Zero Punctuation: Battlefield: Bad Company 2

[Cardo 8 ATL]

Ha. A liberal bashing Fox News, huh? Never seen that before.

Stick to game reviews.

 

[eels05]

please do silent hill shattered memories I've been waiting for it forever!

Not out in Australia yet,frustrating but true.

 

[The_Emperor]

SHENANIGANS! yahtzee has this thing about reviewing multiplayer because "a game should be able to stand on its single player alone"

should it hell, if you make a game with multiplayer in mind review the multiplayer aswell of course bad companies singleplayer was going to be shit because THEY SPENT ALL THE MONEY ON MULTIPLAYER

if you don't like multiplayer games then review a singleplayer game

reviewing a multi player game and giving it a bad review due to the single player bit is like watching a footballer play keepy up and calling him shit everytime he drops the ball.

bc2 and mw2 had dire sp campaigns the mp was pretty good in both tho. so its unfair to give it a single player review.


yahtzee doesnt do it cos hes shit at multiplayer like me but atleast i dont pretend its some kind of moral objection to games being made with a multiplayer focus.

i love yahtzee but slating games every week gets old. im not even a bc2 fanboy im just right.

 

[Littlee300]

I wasn't exactly thrilled with the first game either. What is it with destructable environments anyway? They look pretty but they never really seem to do anything other than clusterfucking the landscape and giving you an option between doorway and hole in the wall. They can bang on about (and I just read about the guy making Body Count bang on about for about three pages) how they alter tactics and strategy and you can't just hide from tanks in inpenetrable buildings anymore, but the fact is that pretty much every player out there is going to treat it almost exactly the same as they would any Call of Duty of Medal of Honor. I thought we were over this shit about the time Black came out.

I like the destructible landscape since I am able to go into a roof top and blow holes where I want to look out. The enemy is probably aimed on the doorway so i am gonna blow up a hole in back of the house.

 

[NeverMemory]

Come to think of it, there are quite a bit of dust; but truthfully, between the cardboard building and all the blurring light I got from the scopes, I didn't cross my mind. In any case, I thought those were just my PC; I thought I need to upgrade my computer ( although it puzzles me to think that my PC runs MW2 just fine, while this one doesn't).

 

[sneakypenguin]

Actually enjoyed this review, the shear amount of suck that was this game deserves some ragging on. Especially multiplayer, and the destruction engine was incredibly useless and game breaking at the same time.

 

[ScottocS]

Dedicated Servers that work FTMFW!
/sarcasm

Fail marketing by DICE. xD

 

[MegaManOfNumbers]

All his critics are correct on the game, but the game ain't bad, in fact its quite good.

This is one of Yahtzee's "I-hate-this-game-but-you-probably-won't" kind of reviews. yes I categorize his reviews.

on an only slightly related note, Zero Punctuation is the only thing preventing me from COMPLETELY hating Wednesdays.

 

[MegaManOfNumbers]

I like this review because he mention a panther. And I love panthers

[http://img230.imageshack.us/i/000618555.jpg/]

Cute panther kittens FTW

WIN!!!

well thank you

Yathzee hates online shooter games

oh, speaking of which, For the love of god guys, Yahtzee HATES, I repeat, HATES ALL ONLINE in video games (the exception being Team Fortress 2). So lay off guys.

 

[Chicago Ted]

While I think Yahtzee's great, I really had to make an account to respond to this one. This review was a big waste for me. I don't have a problem with the fact that Yahtzee refuses to review a game's multiplayer aspect, but then why even bother to review games where the singleplayer is an afterthought and 90% of the playerbase bought it for the multiplayer. Frankly I was surprised this game had any single player at all as the last BF game I played (2142) had no single player campaign at all. The only reason I even played the campaign at all was to get acquainted with the game before throwing myself into multiplayer (not to mention the servers were a mess on opening day). I was so disinterested in a BF singleplayer component that I skipped through every cutscene and I NEVER do that.

Another thing that's annoying me is the "this is just a MW2 ripoff, although I haven't played the multiplayer or even the game itself, so really I have no clue" mentality. If you played the multiplayer at all you'd see how vastly different the game is. If you want to criticize certain aspects of the game, be my guest, but at least be informed about it.

I agree with everything you say here. I like Yahtzee, but this review was a waste.

Welcome to the Escapist by the way.

 

[Seth Edwards]

Technically MW copied BF2 from the PC (as well as the google map loading screens), but it was BF2 in close quarters. Although they added elements of there own of course, but....... It created a bias hardcore fan base (like every next gen with advertising nostalgia). MW indeed copied from battlefield first, so DICE decided to make $**t hit the proverbial fan by pissing on Infinity Ward's building but with RPGs and air strikes. Did anyone else notice the fact DICE was slamming MW in any way. like the new F.R.A.G.S PSA. Anyways my point is Call of duty MW 1 and 2 would actually be running around saying Battlefield (with actual story) Repeat 3 times. They both copy just MW made a foundation of what made BF2 work, while Battlefield (already established in Modern warfare games) picked at some of the features MW had. I am also in denial that the real MW2 will come out soon and this side story was just expensive DLC. Just like transformers 1 and transformers 1/2 not 2. Mr. Bay was clever.

 

[iTouchy]

the dust was seriously ridiculous. got discouraged to continue playing because i couldnt see through it and the russians could see me perfectly fine. and whats the point of having the silenced SCAR when they can hear you anyways -__-

 

[dj Facchiano]

This is another case of a game made around multiplayer with the single player tacked on the last minute. The entire battlefield series up to the original bad company was entirely about multiplayer and DICE still has not gotten the single player right.

Also, just about everything this game does/doesn't do is because MW2 did/didn't do it. Think about it, what has the game done that either is straight off a rip off to Modern Warfare 2 or highly hyped because it isn't doing it? They stuffed the fact that PC's have dedicated servers and that the game is "single play focused" (which it isn't really) while forgetting to mention the story, pacing and even a good deal of the locations are in the realm of "Painting a stolen car to sell it back to the owner."

Ima go ahead and guess you've never played it as your argument is "ITS IN MODERN TIMES, WHAT A RIP OFF!!!! THEY PUT DEDICATED SERVERS!!!! THOSE IW 1UPPING BASTARDS!!!" Thank you for your time.

 

[addeB]

Yahtzee should really stop reviewing games that everyone buys for the multiplayer.

Agreed. I have watched every one of his reviews on this site, and the ones I enjoyed the absolute least were the games that are either successful thanks to their multiplayer components (Halo, Gears of War, Call of Duty, Bad Company, etc.), or have a terrible one that would be amusing to rip to shreds.

The sad thing is Croshaw thinks that multiplayer is useless. My bad, let me use an exact quote rather than speculate: "Unfortunately I don't give a flying sh*t about multiplayer, and neither do a lot of people." (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/8-Halo-3)

That mentality really carries over to every single game he reviews. I hate to burst your bubble Croshaw, but millions of people care about multiplayer. Hence why the games built around it absolutely demolish the games that lack it in terms of sales and popularity. So by you not actually giving an accurate (or any) account of a games multiplayer, you're successfully excluding an enormous portion of the market.

I just don't get how a reviewer in this day and age could not touch on multiplayer in a game. You wouldn't go to a movie blindfolded and complain about the lack of visiuals, just like you shouldn't play a game without touching on the multiplayer and whining about the lack of complexity, depth, replayability, quality, or whatever redeeming quality that multiplayer typically serves as in this day and age.

"depth"? A very few multiplayer modes have a story, and with out a story, a game doesn't add depth to the game for me. For me multiplayer is just a little bonus that i can use if i get bored.

 

[F8L Fool]

"depth"? A very few multiplayer modes have a story, and with out a story, a game doesn't add depth to the game for me. For me multiplayer is just a little bonus that i can use if i get bored.

See for me I don't purchase a game unless it has stellar multiplayer. The reason being that a game without it just lacks the replayability that I am looking for. The gameplay is what matters most to me in a shooter, sports, and fighter. I play RPG's and Adventure games for story first, and gameplay mechanics second. I play MMO's for gameplay and social aspects, and not the story in any way. I could give a damn what the lore behind a dungeon I'm exploring has, or a boss I'm killing.

If a game doesn't have multiplayer it must have at least 80-100 hours of single player content for me to even think of purchasing it. Because frankly 80-100 hours is nothing compared to the 500+ hours I could easily invest in an amazing shooter.

The reason that shooters sell so well is because of the multiplayer experience, and not the story. It's not a coincidence that MW2 sold so damn well. It's not because it had some unbelievable single player campaign. It's because dozens of millions of people are addicts for the MP, just like they are for Halo, Gears of War, Counter Strike, Unreal, Quake, and all those other shooters that are MULTIPLAYER DRIVEN GAMES.

If the aforementioned games didn't have MP, guaranteed they wouldn't have sold even half as well. Maybe not even a quarter as well.

 

[webchameleon]

"OK with Russian Rule"? Well, I guess it is all either pink or red to you foreigners anyway.

(yes, I'm aware your hero was joking)

 

[Abedeus]

Pretty good job and I thought it seemed very Modern Warfare 2 ish. I haven't played the game but I doubt I'll get it (I still enjoy my MW2).

So... why did you think it was like MW2? From his "review"? Single-player, they look similar, but again are different. Multiplayer? No, totally different.

Not from his review but just the general feel. I do mean Single-Player since I haven't really seen much from the Multi-player at all to be honest. And that would be why I said I thought it seemed rather then just it seemed. Plus I do agree that I shouldn't really be making statements on a game I haven't played I just thought I'd throw in my two cents. Is the multi-player better in MW2 or Bad Company dya think?

Honestly? BC is better. Maybe because it's not an arcade shooter like MW2, where people throw frags left and right and impersonate Rambo and his tactics.

Also because vehicle combat is freaking awesome, I love it even when a tank blows up the building I was trying to hide in.

 

[Koganesaga]

Oh Yatzhee, if you'd hated these games from the start instead of enjoying MW (like, FOOLS), your words would sting the public more.

 

[Bek359]

My response to "realistic" (non-stealth) shooters:

1. Games aren't really supposed to be realistic. IT'S WHY YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.

2. Having incredibly low health in a non-stealth game that is supposedly all about multiplayer just encourages too much cheap tactics and people working their level best to find game breakers, of which there are usually many, becausethedevelopersdon'tcareaboutbalanceImeandoubleshotguns,really-(long, increasingly unhinged tirade)

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

 

[WickedSkin]

Just adding that COD: MW/MW2 are the bastard childes of BF2 (The multiplayer part of them CODs). This means that BC/BC2 is the "at least I have the mother daddy married-brother" of COD: MW/MW2. Which makes it a lot better.

My response to "realistic" (non-stealth) shooters:

1. Games aren't really supposed to be realistic. IT'S WHY YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

You should try Vietcong, Crysis, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 1 and 2, BF2, TF Classic, TF2 and something like those.