Support NeoGAF

[Akvod]

I find it offensive that Bad Company 1 has to be associated with Bad Company 2. Bad Company 2 set a lot of the trends that culminated with Battlefield 3.

Low TTK, infantry focus, linear maps with lots of chokepoints, less emphasis on destruction, etc.

And it dissapoints me that Battlefield 4 has its technical problems, because the game made a lot of decisions to go back to its roots.

Combined arms approach, flat open maps, Obliteration mode.

I'm dreading that they're essentially going to go back to a BC2/BF3 approach.

 

[TheSeks]

I love how people act like the BC games are that much different from the mainline games. Aren't they made by the exact same people? Sure, BC2 was probably better than BF3 or BF4, but if you think that all the problems of BF4 are just going to magically disappear and not crop up with Bad Company 3, then you are fooling yourself.

BC 1/2 was Rush gametype focused.

BC 1/2 was 32 player focused.

BC 1/2 was destruction focused.

BF3/4 was Conquest gametype focused.
BF3/4 was 64-player (BF3: PC) focused.
BF3/4 was destruction in certain spots focused.

Same company, yes. Different trajectories in what they were doing, yes.

Would some of the problems disappear if they focused their shit? Yes. Will they? That depends on EA.

 

[Akvod]

BC 1/2 was Rush gametype focused.

BC 1/2 was 32 player focused.

BC 1/2 was destruction focused.

BF3/4 was Conquest gametype focused.
BF3/4 was 64-player (BF3: PC) focused.
BF3/4 was destruction in certain spots focused.

Same company, yes. Different trajectories in what they were doing, yes.

Would some of the problems disappear if they focused their shit? Yes. Will they? That depends on EA.

As someone who loved BC1, Battlefield has no need for Rush mode anymore, and it's been terrible ever since BC2.

At least BC1 took a better approach to Rush by having the focus of Rush about breaching the enemy base by a variety of angles with destruction.

In BC2, they removed a lot of destructible structures, narrowed the maps, and essentially made Rush a meat grinder to rack up kills.

Rush mode was created in order to condense the action to accommodate the low player count (24) on the consoles. With modes like Obliteration that condense the action even more while also maintaining flat, open maps with vehicles, Rush mode is just unnecessary.

 

[Mass Effect]

I miss the Bad Company games. BC1's campaign is still great. Open ended, playground-like, didn't take itself seriously, and funny. Multiplayer was simple and fun. Rush was awesome and the maps still haven't been topped (only rivaled by BC2). Oh, and the music was surprisingly great as well.

BC2's multiplayer was even better. The maps had a good balance of being good for both Rush and Conquest. It wasn't perfect though in that regard. Rush was a bit too linear compared to BC1's more open-ended maps. But to make up for it, Conquest was definitely a lot better in BC2. Its single-player is far weaker than the original's though. They took everything about it and did the exact opposite.

I think BF3 and 4 are still great games, but they'll never be as magical as the Bad Company games for me. I don't think we'll ever get Bad Company 3, and even if we do, it won't be like the first two. It will definitely be like 3 or 4 unfortunately, which at that point I'd rather not have it at all.

Heavy Metal, Panama Canal, Arica Harbor, Atacama Desert, Harvest Day. All so good. There were only a few maps that were eh, most of them were great.

Harvest Day was actually BC1 (later brought over to BC2 along with Oasis).

 

[Akvod]

I say that the next Battlefield game needs to be a Bad Company game.

Right now, DICE and Battlefield have just too much dirt on them for people to trust, and what DICE needs to do is to prove that they could make a proper game.

Bad Company would be a better game to do this than a new IP, given that it still has a lot of goodwill among players.

If they just make the next game something new, like Starwars, people will still distrust DICE.

 

[TheZink]

When I think about Battlefield, I think of stuff like this.I've never had moments like that in 3/4. The sound design was out of this world. Nothing can beat war tapes.

This gives me so many great memories. I've tried to love BF3-4 but it's just not the same anymore.

 

[olimpia84]

Panama Canal makes BC2 the best game by default

 

[soontroll]

For me, BFBC2 was the best. Like leagues and bounds better. I would really love a BC3 that feels like a true sequel to BC2 in every way.



Heavy Metal, Panama Canal, Arica Harbor, Atacama Desert, Harvest Day. All so good. There were only a few maps that were eh, most of them were great.

Depends which game mode you're talking about. Most of those were absolute shit for conquest. Only decent conquest map is Harvest Day.
Even for Rush they weren't great. I mean Heavy Metal? That is literally 3 flags in a line with nothing in between. Same with atacama desert.

 

[Dr Duncan Steel]

I love Bad Company, but i'm not sure that i'd want a sequel since DICE believes that the humor was part of the reason why it wasn't as successful as the main games.



http://www.totalxbox.com/66753/battlefield-bad-companys-humour-limited-its-appeal-says-dice/

I hate the fact that a human being actually said that.

Gutted.

 

[Recall]

Multiplayer in Bad Company 2 and the Vietnam DLC on my 360 is up there as some of the most enjoyment I've ever had playing an online game.

 

[Marvel]

BC > BF

Please do a 3rd ffs.

 

[Jawmuncher]

Would love for Bad Company to return.
For me BC2 is still the best Battlefield game around. The MP was just so much fun something that I felt was missing in 3. It just seemed to serious in 3 even though I know you could still pull off a lot of crazy stuff. Haven't given BF4 a try due to all the technical problems and probably never will.

 

[Bold One]

BC2 was the most fun I ever had in MP last generation. It wasn't burdened by blind ambition, it wasn't being used as canon-fodder in EA's attempts to usurp Activision's COD.

It was jusp pure hectic fun, and pretty balanced too, with the best map from any MP I have ever played,

all hail based Arica Harbor

 

[Creaking]

Bad Company 2 is what got me into the recent Battlefield games. I played 1942 back in the day, but never really anything after that.

Bad Company 2's multiplayer was blissful oblivion. I miss those maps dearly.

 

[Woorloog]

all hail based Arica Harbor

Oh, man. The city was completely leveled after a long (conquest) match. That was damn fun.
Really regret selling my BC2 for BF3 (360/360).
Are there still people playing BC2 on PC?

 

[NameGenerated]

I'd rather not go back to the BC series.

 

[Auto-Reply]

I will only return to the Battlefield games if it's a Bad Company game, i'm done with standard BF so i hope that someday there is another one!

 

[dapperbandit]

At this point I don't see how a new Bad Company game would be differet from a new Battlefield game besides the characters and the tone of the campaign.

I'm sure EA and DICE are well aware of this. If they want infantry focused maps like those in the BC games they can feature that in the DLC.

That said, I think BC2 had some great maps for vehicles like Harvest Day.

 

[Scully Scully Scoo]

Oh, man. The city was completely leveled after a long (conquest) match. That was damn fun.
Really regret selling my BC2 for BF3 (360/360).
Are there still people playing BC2 on PC?

Yep pc version is still active, consoles are dead

 

[Lucifon]

As someone who works in social media I can tell you this is just a standard post, you're definitely looking too much into it. 'TBT' is a social media trend, which if you're running a page odds are you'd jump on the bandwagon too.

That said, I do think a new Bad Company is on the way.

 

[larrybird33]

Bad Company 2 was the pinnacle of BF online. BF3 was the shark jumping boulder puncher.

As good as BC2 was, given the series recent record, there's no reason to believe BC3 would be any better or not suffer the same issues as BF4.

 

[Isurus]

BC2 was the most fun I ever had in MP last generation. It wasn't burdened by blind ambition, it wasn't being used as canon-fodder in EA's attempts to usurp Activision's COD.

It was jusp pure hectic fun, and pretty balanced too, with the best map from any MP I have ever played,

all hail based Arica Harbor

Hail!

I love this game; it's what brought me back to Battlefield after not playing since 1942. Couldn't agree more with all of the comments in here. Just hoping that it doesn't become bloatware if/when they decide to make a 3rd iteration.

 

[thesuperfunk]

Bad Company 3 ... be still my beating heart.

 

[Octacamo]

arica harbour and Laguna presa <3

man all maps were grt really miss bad company 2 mp

 

[DaciaJC]

BC2 was the most fun I ever had in MP last generation. It wasn't burdened by blind ambition, it wasn't being used as canon-fodder in EA's attempts to usurp Activision's COD.

"In March we will launch Battlefield: Bad Company 2, which is our first strong attack on Call Of Duty."

Much of the gameplay design in BC2 also indicates the game was made with the aim of attracting the CoD audience.

 

[pokeystaples]

I'd definitely jump back in for BC3, but not BF5. I don't care if you add cops or whatever the hell. I wanna chuckle during single player from time to time and not just get weird set piece moments.

 

[Bold One]

Oh, man. The city was completely leveled after a long (conquest) match. That was damn fun.
Really regret selling my BC2 for BF3 (360/360).
Are there still people playing BC2 on PC?

I played on the PS3, its semi active depending on the time of day,

but it is very likely that its quite active still on PC

 

[The Incredible Muffin]

Bad company, you mean EA?

so,,, clever

 

[TheSinkingKnight]

I think Visercal could make a good Bad Company game. I hope the design is more open than DICE's campaigns. Also, I doubt it would be called Bad Company 3, a lot of casual gamers that I know in college thought Bad Company 2 was Battlefield 2 and would be confused as can be with Bad Company 2.

 

[Topsu]

For me personally, the original Bad Company was the most amazing thing ever. As it was my first online multiplayer game, I really got used to the way the MP worked and have never encountered another game that would hook me the same way with its online functions. I spent dozens of summer nights playing the MP in 2008, it was truly an incredible experience.

I never got to playing BF3 or 4, even though I bought both of them. But I'm guaranteed to spent a lot of my life on a new Bad Company if they make one.

 

[Lord of Castamere]

I still don't understand why people think BC3 will go back to the roots of the spin off. As others have said the only real difference between the mutiplayer of Bf4 and BC2 is the straight line nature used for Rush. Which I enjoyed thoroughly Rush is a pain to play now as every mapped is unbalanced as ass. I swear on 360 in the 40 so hours I put in before going next gen I literally only saw the Tower on Shanghai and the Hotel on Hainan once. Aftermath proved that Dice can still make good Rush maps now we just have to see if they are will to devote another game to them.

BC 1/2 was destruction focused.
BF3/4 was destruction in certain spots focused.

Oh Come now. Bf4 has the same level of macro-destruction of BC2 plus the added micro-destruction of Bf3. Even the vanilla maps of Bf3 have some buildings that can collapse it's just that there are only a handful of them in the game.

 

[The Incredible Muffin]

I liked BC2,

but do not get how anyone can think it was better than BF3 or 4.

I bought BC2 because I was done with BF2 and wanted something like that. Wow what a disappointment. The conquest what is BF in my eyes sucked in BC2.

BF3 and 4 got this done WAY better. 3 and 4 seem like a BF game. BC2 like some cartoony mix between COD and other arena shooters with clunky vehicles that add nothing.

Yes I play on the PC so do not have that many issues.

BC2 was fun for,,, a couple hours. LMG were ridiculously overpowered. The class system didn't make any sense, looked cartoony, horrible vehicles. Maps were so so. The horrible white light, deserts looked eye blinding.

(Same reason I cant play CS:GO,, the cartoony look, cant be taken serious)

 

[soontroll]

I liked BC2,

but do not get how anyone can think it was better than BF3 or 4.

I bought BC2 because I was done with BF2 and wanted something like that. Wow what a disappointment. The conquest what is BF in my eyes sucked in BC2.

BF3 and 4 got this done WAY better. 3 and 4 seem like a BF game. BC2 like some cartoony mix between COD and other arena shooters with clunky vehicles that add nothing.

Yes I play on the PC so do not have that many issues.

BC2 was fun for,,, a couple hours. LMG were ridiculously overpowered. The class system didn't make any sense, looked cartoony, horrible vehicles. Maps were so so. The horrible white light, deserts looked eye blinding.

(Same reason I cant play CS:GO,, the cartoony look, cant be taken serious)

BC2 was a spin-off and did a decent job at what it was aiming to do. It was never advertised as a sequel to BF2.

I cannot believe you can think BF3 seemed like a BF game. Maybe more like a BF game than BC2 but still not close. BF3 had (maybe still has but I haven't played in a while) horrible map design, shitty dlc, no VOIP, horrible netcode, suppression, blinding lens flares, dorito spotting, audio-spotting, no commander mode, poor commo rose, no battle recorder, no mod tools, so on and so forth. It was a major disappointment and I think BF4 has attempted to back to its roots a bit more, though I don't own that game so I wouldn't know the details.

 

[Spinluck]

The last great Battlefield game.

 

[endlessflood]

I liked BC2,

but do not get how anyone can think it was better than BF3 or 4.

I bought BC2 because I was done with BF2 and wanted something like that. Wow what a disappointment. The conquest what is BF in my eyes sucked in BC2.

BF3 and 4 got this done WAY better. 3 and 4 seem like a BF game. BC2 like some cartoony mix between COD and other arena shooters with clunky vehicles that add nothing.

Yes I play on the PC so do not have that many issues.

BC2 was fun for,,, a couple hours. LMG were ridiculously overpowered. The class system didn't make any sense, looked cartoony, horrible vehicles. Maps were so so. The horrible white light, deserts looked eye blinding.

(Same reason I cant play CS:GO,, the cartoony look, cant be taken serious)

I played 1942 on PC (and Mac), BF2 on PC, BFBC1 on PS3, 1943 on PS3, BFBC2 on PS3, BF3 on PS3, and BF4 on PS4. Of those, BFBC2 on PS3 is by far the most fun I've had not only in any battlefield game, but in any MP game full stop. I just found the teamwork required in Rush in BFBC2 to be perfect (possibly helped by the fact that I'm in a social gaming clan and always played with friends).

The map design, graphics, scale, destruction, gun balance, class balance, spot mechanic, netcode, etc., it all just worked perfectly for me. On the PS3 the only changes I would have made were adding a server browser, stopping quick scoping with bolt action rifles, eliminating circle strafing choppers, and toning down front on knifing. I wouldn't have touched anything else.

I still live in hope that they'll port the PC version of BFBC2 to the PS4. I would pay good money for it, and play the shit out of it.

 

[Raoh]

Loved BC2

 

[Digital-Hero]

Not a fan of the Bad Company franchise and its limited scope. I'll take the buggy BF4.

 

[Nvzman]

Personally I never liked BC2 as a whole (I vastly preferred 4, even if it is unplayable), but it'd still be nice to go back to Bad Company. At least that one had a playable single-player.

 

[TheSeks]

Oh Come now. Bf4 has the same level of macro-destruction of BC2 plus the added micro-destruction of Bf3. Even the vanilla maps of Bf3 have some buildings that can collapse it's just that there are only a handful of them in the game.

BARK! NO YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND.gif

Look at BC2's surface of the moon level of destruction. Now go try to do that in BF3/4. You can't.

DICE had good intentions in regards to "nerfing" destruction to allow the defese and players some form of cover in maps instead of "stalemates" where the majority of the map is barren and players can't reach things.

Unfortunately, this leads to impossible chokepoints that can't be "punched" though (to use Dreams words, Hi Dreamy! <3) and since DICE doesn't allow WIDE-OPEN with limits design in Rush, these become imposssible to take in Rush. In Conquest it's just as bad, but in Conquest you generally have air vehicles or jetskis that can get around said chokepoints and the maps are a little more open. But the chokepoint problem is still there.

 

[BibiMaghoo]

The last great Battlefield game.

Pretty much how I feel. It was a fantastic game, that destroyed my love of conquest and in place made me Rush for life. Of course at the time I didn't realise they would ruin Rush in subsequent games.

And dem free maps.

 

[TheSeks]

Are there still people playing BC2 on PC?

I dunno... you tell me?

 

[thejazzking]

BC2 had horrible maps, especially for conquest.

But it had the best Rush maps by far. Nothing comes close to Rush on Isla, Valparaiso, Port Valdez, Arica Harbour etc. Rush was all I played, I have never much cared for conquest.

I even liked the less varied customisation. Restricting sight upgrades to a "perk slot", for want of a better word, meant that more people ran iron sights which led to closer range engagements in general. It was more difficult to use PDWs at longer ranges, making class roles more clearly defined - rather than being able to use the MP7 at even extreme ranges a la BF3.

They just nailed everything in that game. Not being able to sit on a hill at the attackers spawn and see all the way to the end of the map was a huge bonus that they seem to have forgotten in subsequent games (I'm looking at you, hill/rooftop snipers on Operation Firestorm, or more recently Zavod 311). Also, there was much better MCOM placement: who the fuck thought it was a good idea to put an MCOM in a room with only one entrance?! (Again, last base of Zavod 311).

Damn, I loved that game so much.

(Sorry for rant.)

 

[thejazzking]

I played 1942 on PC (and Mac), BF2 on PC, BFBC1 on PS3, 1943 on PS3, BFBC2 on PS3, BF3 on PS3, and BF4 on PS4. Of those, BFBC2 on PS3 is by far the most fun I've had not only in any battlefield game, but in any MP game full stop. I just found the teamwork required in Rush in BFBC2 to be perfect (possibly helped by the fact that I'm in a social gaming clan and always played with friends).

The map design, graphics, scale, destruction, gun balance, class balance, spot mechanic, netcode, etc., it all just worked perfectly for me. On the PS3 the only changes I would have made were adding a server browser, stopping quick scoping with bolt action rifles, eliminating circle strafing choppers, and toning down front on knifing. I wouldn't have touched anything else.

I still live in hope that they'll port the PC version of BFBC2 to the PS4. I would pay good money for it, and play the shit out of it.

All of this! I agree with every word, except I didn't have a problem with the knifing - I actually preferred the knifing mechanic (who gives a shit about dog tags?). I only played with one or two other people, but it was so much fun. In fact, I wasn't even bothered by the 'quick-scoping'. The only thing I didn't like was circle-strafing choppers, Oasis could turn completely unplayable if the attackers had a good chopper pilot. If we're being picky, I would say adding lock-on launchers would be better than the tracer gun, but to be honest no-scoping RPGs was the way forward (check out Masdeath 360 RPG montages on Youtube - insane!).

I too would pay good money for a straight port of BFBC2 to PS4.

 

[soontroll]

But it had the best Rush maps by far. Nothing comes close to Rush on Isla, Valparaiso, Port Valdez, Arica Harbour etc. Rush was all I played, I have never much cared for conquest.

I even liked the less varied customisation. Restricting sight upgrades to a "perk slot", for want of a better word, meant that more people ran iron sights which led to closer range engagements in general. It was more difficult to use PDWs at longer ranges, making class roles more clearly defined - rather than being able to use the MP7 at even extreme ranges a la BF3.

They just nailed everything in that game. Not being able to sit on a hill at the attackers spawn and see all the way to the end of the map was a huge bonus that they seem to have forgotten in subsequent games (I'm looking at you, hill/rooftop snipers on Operation Firestorm, or more recently Zavod 311). Also, there was much better MCOM placement: who the fuck thought it was a good idea to put an MCOM in a room with only one entrance?! (Again, last base of Zavod 311).

Damn, I loved that game so much.

(Sorry for rant.)

I will admit I had a lot of fun playing rush mode with my friends and I played that more than conquest since the maps were horribly designed for it. I certainly enjoyed BC2 more then BF3. It's just that my heart lies with conquest mode ever since the original BF games so I might be biased

All of this! I agree with every word, except I didn't have a problem with the knifing - I actually preferred the knifing mechanic (who gives a shit about dog tags?). I only played with one or two other people, but it was so much fun. In fact, I wasn't even bothered by the 'quick-scoping'. The only thing I didn't like was circle-strafing choppers, Oasis could turn completely unplayable if the attackers had a good chopper pilot. If we're being picky, I would say adding lock-on launchers would be better than the tracer gun, but to be honest no-scoping RPGs was the way forward (check out Masdeath 360 RPG montages on Youtube - insane!).

I too would pay good money for a straight port of BFBC2 to PS4.

Oh god. Please no lock-on launchers. Tracer darts encouraged teamplay and AT4s required skill. This was something BC2 did right. BF3 aerial combat was shit because of the constant beep beep flares system.

 

[thejazzking]

I will admit I had a lot of fun playing rush mode with my friends and I played that more than conquest since the maps were horribly designed for it. I certainly enjoyed BC2 more then BF3. It's just that my heart lies with conquest mode ever since the original BF games so I might be biased

Oh god. Please no lock-on launchers. Tracer darts encouraged teamplay and AT4s required skill. This was something BC2 did right. BF3 aerial combat was shit because of the constant beep beep flares system.

Hmm... Ok, I will concede that point. As annoying as tracer darts were, I get that the lock-on system is just as broken - but in a different way.

AT4s, I never got on with them. I was the no-scope RPG guy, my mate was the AT4 guy. Still, I'll just be happy without circle-strafing attack choppers. Also, there's no need for jets. Just going to throw that out there.

(Btw, this was the reason I joined NeoGAF. Sensible, reasoned discussion about videogames. Thanks.)

 

[secondspace]

Rush was so good on BC2 - jeeps flipping into the air on Atacama Desert, hails of rockets taking down choppers on Isla Inocentes, fighting to get a line of sight on that lock up garage on Arica Harbor - nothing has come near it for me since. The main series is geared for 64 player Conquest and that really leaves you at the mercy of random players, Rush has certainly been a let down in BF3 and 4, there are probably too many reasons to list.

 

[thejazzking]

Rush was so good on BC2 - jeeps flipping into the air on Atacama Desert, hails of rockets taking down choppers on Isla Inocentes, fighting to get a line of sight on that lock up garage on Arica Harbor - nothing has come near it for me since. The main series is geared for 64 player Conquest and that really leaves you at the mercy of random players, Rush has certainly been a let down in BF3 and 4, there are probably too many reasons to list.

Yep. This. It's as if the maps were never designed for Rush in BF3 or 4. They have these conquest maps and just try and place objectives.

Who the fuck thought it was a good idea to put an MCOM in that room in the tower at the end of Zavod 311?! One, single route of ingress.

There are so many reasons as to why BF3 and 4 fall short of the mark.

 

[Myafterhours]

Props for the hispanic lead character

 

[SniperHunter]

Rush was so good on BC2 - jeeps flipping into the air on Atacama Desert, hails of rockets taking down choppers on Isla Inocentes, fighting to get a line of sight on that lock up garage on Arica Harbor - nothing has come near it for me since. The main series is geared for 64 player Conquest and that really leaves you at the mercy of random players, Rush has certainly been a let down in BF3 and 4, there are probably too many reasons to list.

Right on
Best thing about bc2 were the physics. Both object physics and vehicular physics

 

[Lord of Castamere]

i just want more urban maps like Africa harbor.
Dice has yet to make a new map with a more packed in urban area that equals AF.
Every map in Bf4 is like 3 buildings plus cap point, stretch of land and hills, 3 more buildings plus cap point, another stretch of hills and land, unique map building plus cap point etc.