DodgyGeezerFella
Member
Made me laugh :lol
From the twitter -
Or as i took it "No fucking around"
From the twitter -
Or as i took it "No fucking around"
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
New BF:Bad Company 2 trailer/screens
- Thread starter Arcipello
- Start date
The Faceless Master
Member
there is nothing i would trade to think killcam was an ok addition.recklessmind said:
Kibbles
Member
DeadGzuz said:
... You do know that's for Windows Live games only. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is going to release as a PC Game. Sure you could configure the controller, but it's not going to be built for it at all and you won't get any buttons on screen resembling it to help you out. Just because you can plug a 360 controller into the computer doesn't mean the devs must go out of their way to make the game work for it. DICE isn't doing so.
Also, I'd take the developer's word over yours as to what is featured in their game. :lol
I'm not too against the idea of kill cams it would give me something to watch while waiting for the respawn timer to finish.
Since this is battlefield why not try a different type of kill cam, one thats different than COD and at the same time keeps snipers happy.
One that for a split second reveals the enemy firing position then follows the player in 3rd person view camera and shows how he dies. Kinda like this.
Since this is battlefield why not try a different type of kill cam, one thats different than COD and at the same time keeps snipers happy.
One that for a split second reveals the enemy firing position then follows the player in 3rd person view camera and shows how he dies. Kinda like this.
recklessmind said:
Prone is one of the huge issues. One of the things that could potentially stop me from buying BC2. When a tank/helicopter/artillery/jeep thing is shooting at you, and you need to take cover, you aren't just going to crouch down and hope that whatever you're hiding behind is an inch taller than your head when crouching. Prone is needed badly.
I know they claimed that snipers would be too hard to spot if prone was in the game, but playing in BC, it was just as effective to crouch in a bush a mile away as it would be to go prone behind said bush.
And if someone uses prone to their advantage to remain undetected, why is that a bad thing? This isn't Unreal Tournament or Halo or something.
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
The Faceless Master said:
I just figure prone would render the killcam pretty useless... I could squeeze off a couple shots and then crawl a little ways and set up again. This way I wouldn't have to constantly change position I worked so hard to get.
I'm not a fan of just straight-up camping... but I think games like this are just as much about optimally positioning yourself for success on a dynamically changing battlefield as they are about reflexes and skill.
I like my shooters to be a nice balance of strategy and skill... Battlefield has always been that for me. Taking away prone was kind of a kick in the balls, but still manageable. Adding killcam and not having prone is basically giving the finger to the recon class.
Not cool.
I play support more than anything else, but recon is still a favorite of mine... with killcam/no prone I have a feeling playing recon class would hurt the team more than help... especially now that things like motion sensors and other gadgets are cross-class customizable. Killcam will dramatically lower average k/d for recon players and their numbers are already substandard. When we spawn in and I see half the team in ghillies I know we're about to get ganked hard. This could potentially be even worse.
Asmodai said:
I could not agree with you more on this... my exact sentiments. As an old school Ghost Recon player, my first instinct is still to hit the dirt as soon as I take direct fire, or get spotted. Not fucking run away bunny hopping... because I have no other options.
i will die before bunnyhopping
The Faceless Master
Member
seriously, with some of the spots (mostly bushes) i hide in with just a crouch, oh man, prone would be soooooo much fun!Asmodai said:
they just need to make it so you can't instant pronr/unprone or move around faster than a snail's pace in prone. no MGS4 prone antics...
and i don't even main recon, i can't imagine how happy the people who do would be.
yeah, sometimes an optimal position is a bush you worked to get to, and then you kill someone and the killcam shows where you are, and the next bush is like 50ft away... or doesn't exist at all... fuck!!!recklessmind said:
for example, there's a spot on ascension on defense on the first set of crates... its a bush and a tree on the side of the road by the rock wall, halfway between the barn and the first crate. you can duck there and snipe anyone who comes up the main road, i've sniped hundreds of people from there, including dozens who drove the jeep up. most people won't even look twice at that spot unless i don't kill then in 1 shot. M95 means they drop in 1 bodyshot as long as they're past the sign on the right. it's a great spot, but as soon as you move away from there, you're in the clear and as good as dead. nice spots like that would be ruined with a killcam, even with prone.
facelessmaster, I was sniping from that exact bush in the BFBC beta :lol
Such a good sniper spot, I've had enemies walk by 2 feet away and not see me in there.
Prone was perfect in Battlefield 2. Well, except for the dolphin diving (imagine bunny hopping and prone combined....from an even lower circle of hell), but dolphin diving was only possible with PC controls and macros, so it wouldn't be a problem on consoles.
And recklessmind, I agree completely on bunny hopping. The problem is that as it stands right now, bunny hopping is pretty damn effective in BFBC. It's one of the major problems low bullet damage brings with it.
Such a good sniper spot, I've had enemies walk by 2 feet away and not see me in there.
fps fanatic said:
Prone was perfect in Battlefield 2. Well, except for the dolphin diving (imagine bunny hopping and prone combined....from an even lower circle of hell), but dolphin diving was only possible with PC controls and macros, so it wouldn't be a problem on consoles.
And recklessmind, I agree completely on bunny hopping. The problem is that as it stands right now, bunny hopping is pretty damn effective in BFBC. It's one of the major problems low bullet damage brings with it.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
fps fanatic said:
It wouldn't surprise me, if it's the right kind of noise. No harm in trying, so maybe you should hit up their message boards?
Also, has BFBC been patched a lot since release? It feels like bullet damage is higher and that aiming is more precise now than when I played it around release. Could just be my poor memory.
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
Have they even shown how killcam is going to work? A traditional killcam would be complete horseshit but maybe they have something else in mind?
How prevalent is the "camping" complaint? I thought battlefield players were pretty used to recon class and getting popped if you're running around out in the open. They nerfed recon by removing prone but do you think there was enough complaints that they intentionally added the cam option to further weaken the recon class... and cater to the run n' gunners?
I actually haven't seen the killcam in action so I'm just going off what other games do... maybe it's not quite as bad as I'm assuming.
I just think the combo of no prone and killcam is obnoxious... recon class is going to end up being really ineffective and niche.
Also... are pistols going to be a kit customization in addition to gadgets? There are some classes where I'd appreciate a freaking switch to pistol option instead of a waiting through a long ass reload.
How prevalent is the "camping" complaint? I thought battlefield players were pretty used to recon class and getting popped if you're running around out in the open. They nerfed recon by removing prone but do you think there was enough complaints that they intentionally added the cam option to further weaken the recon class... and cater to the run n' gunners?
I actually haven't seen the killcam in action so I'm just going off what other games do... maybe it's not quite as bad as I'm assuming.
I just think the combo of no prone and killcam is obnoxious... recon class is going to end up being really ineffective and niche.
Also... are pistols going to be a kit customization in addition to gadgets? There are some classes where I'd appreciate a freaking switch to pistol option instead of a waiting through a long ass reload.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
The killcam worries me less after mclaren here said that it was alright.
Do you guys still play this? I'm certainly no good, but I'm starting to get fed up with jumping into choppers only to have the pilot crash and burn seconds after. Would be cool to play with someone who knows the game.
Do you guys still play this? I'm certainly no good, but I'm starting to get fed up with jumping into choppers only to have the pilot crash and burn seconds after. Would be cool to play with someone who knows the game.
The Faceless Master
Member
seriously, people will come all the way around the barn, up along that wall, and walk/run right past... then get shot in the back!Asmodai said:
recklessmind said:
Remember that the PC battlefield crowd and the console shooter crowd are pretty different. In my experience, those who liked the PC Battlefield games generally don't like Bad Company, and those who really like Bad Company generally never played the earlier PC games.
Thing is, in earlier games, taking out snipers wasn't that hard, thanks to the accurate and lethal weapons. Hell, in BF2, snipers were almost always free knife kills. They were renowned for...well, pretty much sucking.
However, in BFBC, where sniper rifles and shotguns are the only guns that can kill with less than 10 shots to the chest, it becomes a very different scenario.
Personally I never had a problem with snipers in BFBC, but then again I was either sniper or anti tank because the shotgun and sniper rifle killed quickly.
Nizz
Member
Funny you said that, I just went to the Battlefield forums and someone has a poll going about going prone: http://forum.ea.com/eaforum/posts/list/283083.pageAltogetherAndrews said:
Last I checked, it was 73% for, 27% against. Maybe DICE will listen?
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Why would anyone vote against? Fear of snipers?
The Faceless Master
Member
from what i've heard from other people playing, a sniper camping out somewhere is a part of the game.Asmodai said:
and as far as snipers go, i know i turn to my knife often when cornered, and against snipers, i backpedal if they're too close, because i expect the knife.
*logs in*fps fanatic said:
*votes*
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
Asmodai said:
Melee is on the BC "broken" list... imo
AltogetherAndrews said:
I actually don't even have my 360/PS3 atm (boring story)... I won't be able to rebuy for at least a few more weeks. Other stuff takes priority. Soon though.
I'm suffering freaking withdrawals...
The Faceless Master
Member
no, what i'm saying is if i'm a sniper, i'll pull my knife, and if they're a sniper, i backpedal and fire. if we're both snipers, it'll probably be knife on knife.Asmodai said:
Stoney Mason
Banned
AltogetherAndrews said:
In a relatively big map game snipers have a lot of power. And with less people in the game (24) they are pretty powerful. A lot of people don't like sniper/campers and adding prone would be even more to their benefit.
I would assume that is the counter argument of why it was removed in the first pace. I'm not saying I necessarily agree. I don't. I'm saying, I assume that is somewhat close to the thinking of why it was removed. For balance and pacing that they wanted to create for this iteration of the series.
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
Stoney Mason said:
Yeah... I understand the reasoning (also don't agree) but if you play a lot of BC... recon is not overpowered. They are actually pretty weak going by average k/d.
They can't help much on gold rush objectives (though they are a little better at helping take/keep flags)... As far as real strengths: they are powerful against tanks and if you play close to your squad and all you do is chuck motion sensors (especially if you're right next to a ammo crate for instant refills) that can really help a team.
But overall most people suck at recon and the handful of kills those knuckleheads usually get are offset by a similar number of deaths. Letting people customize kits makes recon even more irrelevant. Imo, no need to nerf them further with a killcam punishment.
That's the crux of it right there... kill cam is punishment for the better player and a concession for reckless play.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
I like well hidden snipers. I loathe snipers and typically give myself the role of sniper-killer, so the more hidden, the more fun the hunt is. And the more surprised they are when they get shot.
I had an idea earlier for a cool way to launch accurate 40mm grenade shells I used my horrible paint skills to try to illustrate it what do you think gaf. :lol
You guys remember playing bf bad company , remember that pesky sniper that hid in the a house just patiently sniping without a worry. There was times when I was standing 50 feet away in an adjacent building wishing I could accurately launch a 40mm grenade into the window right into the snipers room. Using the games controls this can prove to be a bit challenging so I came up with an idea.
What if the game had a perk or weapon attachment that would assist you in firing the 40mm grenade launchers. It would require some work and careful aiming so it wouldnt be overpowered but if you have the patience you would be able to land dead on shot with your 40mm grenade launcher everytime in the first shot.
My idea essentially is a laser on the assault rifle, or if there is limited dev time the sniper laser designator would suffice.
The way it would work is in the following steps.
Step 1. You have the 'Laser Perk' Equipped and a 40mm grenade launcher, you sacrifice some other ability like throwing out health packs or ammo for this. You see a target you want to Hit for now lets say a window in a house.
Step 2. You press right on the dpad to use your gun mounted laser to laze the wall area that is the same elevation as the window.
Step 3. You Equip your 40mm grenade launcher and do no move much otherwise the laser coordinates are no longer valid or accurate. Now that you have an active laser spot you take out your 40mm grenade launcher and somewhere on your hud it will display an UP or Down arrow telling you how high or low you need to aim to hit the targets elevation.
Step 4. Aim the cursor so its close to the window and fire. Now relish as the camping sniper or squad is destroyed or at the very least hurt by your expert 40mm shot from 50 feet away.
So what do you guys think ? Please bear in mind this is just my general idea of a cool new addition for battlefield its probably not balanced right and would need alot of tweaks.
Please be kind on my noob paint skills
You guys remember playing bf bad company , remember that pesky sniper that hid in the a house just patiently sniping without a worry. There was times when I was standing 50 feet away in an adjacent building wishing I could accurately launch a 40mm grenade into the window right into the snipers room. Using the games controls this can prove to be a bit challenging so I came up with an idea.
What if the game had a perk or weapon attachment that would assist you in firing the 40mm grenade launchers. It would require some work and careful aiming so it wouldnt be overpowered but if you have the patience you would be able to land dead on shot with your 40mm grenade launcher everytime in the first shot.
My idea essentially is a laser on the assault rifle, or if there is limited dev time the sniper laser designator would suffice.
The way it would work is in the following steps.
Step 1. You have the 'Laser Perk' Equipped and a 40mm grenade launcher, you sacrifice some other ability like throwing out health packs or ammo for this. You see a target you want to Hit for now lets say a window in a house.
Step 2. You press right on the dpad to use your gun mounted laser to laze the wall area that is the same elevation as the window.
Step 3. You Equip your 40mm grenade launcher and do no move much otherwise the laser coordinates are no longer valid or accurate. Now that you have an active laser spot you take out your 40mm grenade launcher and somewhere on your hud it will display an UP or Down arrow telling you how high or low you need to aim to hit the targets elevation.
Step 4. Aim the cursor so its close to the window and fire. Now relish as the camping sniper or squad is destroyed or at the very least hurt by your expert 40mm shot from 50 feet away.
So what do you guys think ? Please bear in mind this is just my general idea of a cool new addition for battlefield its probably not balanced right and would need alot of tweaks.
Please be kind on my noob paint skills
AltogetherAndrews
Member
But that's what the launcher elevated crosshair is for. It gives you all the information right there, you just have to be familiar enough with the weapon to use it. I don't get it.
Stoney Mason
Banned
recklessmind said:
I would like prone in BC 2 but it's not really a big issue for me personally. Especially since I'm not a sniper although prone is often useful in certain situations beyond just sniping.
The larger issue in BC 2 for me remains the relatively low player count for a game of this type imo.
As much as I liked 1943 I grew to find the 24 player count somewhat limiting. If you are going to have all these vehicles in BC 2, it seems even more likely to be an issue here.
elrechazado
Banned
That's the second, longer, try to sell that system Gibonez. Try the official forums
AltogetherAndrews
Member
I'm sort of hoping for BF3 proper to take on player count. Not MMO style (ever), but something like MAG. That game proves that it can be done without being a cagematch clusterfuck, but I find myself feeling that the battlefield is, uh, nerfed.
I plain don't understand the idea. There's already a very accurate targeting system for the weapon, so I don't quite understand what the point of the laser designator is.
elrechazao said:That's the second, longer, try to sell that system Gibonez. Try the official forums
I plain don't understand the idea. There's already a very accurate targeting system for the weapon, so I don't quite understand what the point of the laser designator is.
elrechazado
Banned
AltogetherAndrews said:
Neither do I, but if we don't stop him now, he'll have 15 new images and even more MS painting all over them next time.
Stoney Mason
Banned
AltogetherAndrews said:
Personally I don't necessarily need a playercount of MAG although people are free to desire that. I find when games get too big, they turn into clusterfuck city.
The problem with just 24 in a Battlefield game though is that it provides very little opportunity to actually defend bases. The game tends to turn into capture a base. Move onto the next and leave no one to defend the base you just captured. Get that base taken from you quickly since no one is there. Repeat for the entire game.
This is partially because the lower player count doesn't provide enough numbers to actually give you a real option to defend bases. And partially because of the way conquest is designed in general.
(And here is where I bring in a relevant comparison to another game that is unabashedly trying to be a Battlefield clone so the comparison is relevant for this specific issue at least.) Frontlines addressed this by not only having a larger player count but also introducing a different play type where it was more about pushing forward a line of scrimmage rather than randomly defending bases on the map. I think there is something Bad Company could learn from both of these examples.
Gibonez....aim the grenade launcher where you want the grenade round to go. Simple. If you can't do that, practice and get better, or give up.
No offense, but using the grenade launcher accurately at all ranges is a skill, one of the more important ones in Battlefield games. Having a laser designator help you with that would be like having a laser designator help you with aiming a gun because you sucked at it.
Personally I don't see why anyone would want to play with a class other than recon in BFBC, other than to just test out the weapons on the classes. And once they've established that all of the fully automatic guns are horrible, they would stick to the sniper rifles.
Look at it this way: if the game is too friendly to snipers, then it becomes a question of "Who wants to run through the sniper infested map to stand beside the flag, and who wants to be the sniper taking potshots at guys in the open trying to take flags?"
I know I never cared about taking flags in BFBC, and was always using them to get enemies in the open for easy kills.
No offense, but using the grenade launcher accurately at all ranges is a skill, one of the more important ones in Battlefield games. Having a laser designator help you with that would be like having a laser designator help you with aiming a gun because you sucked at it.
recklessmind said:
Personally I don't see why anyone would want to play with a class other than recon in BFBC, other than to just test out the weapons on the classes. And once they've established that all of the fully automatic guns are horrible, they would stick to the sniper rifles.
Look at it this way: if the game is too friendly to snipers, then it becomes a question of "Who wants to run through the sniper infested map to stand beside the flag, and who wants to be the sniper taking potshots at guys in the open trying to take flags?"
I know I never cared about taking flags in BFBC, and was always using them to get enemies in the open for easy kills.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Right, but isn't that what the special grenade launcher targeting reticle is for? It allows you to calculate elevation. Or are you saying that it should simply be made easier? If so, I disagree. The last thing any shooter needs is effortless pin point grenade launcher accuracy.
endlessflood
Member
I found the same thing in 43. I guess the massively destructible environments really increase the amount of data that needs to be transferred between clients and the server. It's a shame because 32 players would be perfect.Stoney Mason said:
AltogetherAndrews said:
He says that he can't aim the grenade launcher at 50 feet and wants a laser designator to do it for him. Obviously this is a horrible, horrible idea.
endlessflood said:
You kidding me? The best BF2 and Desert Combat games were 64 players. Accept no substitutes!
COD4 and MW2 get around this by having small maps and no respawn times, so that the player count is kept high and the firefights are as intense as they were in big Battlefield games.
But 24 players on huge Battlefield maps with respawn times are just stretched too thinly.
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Stoney Mason said:
Not if the objectives and squads are designed for it. Ignoring any other problems I have with MAG, it has proved that higher player count can be achieved without becoming meat grinders. I'd have even more faith in DICE to get something like this right. I don't need 256 players, but upwards of 128 would be neat.
Asmodai said:
Yeah. In my opinion, grenade launching should be treated like a good splash damage but blunt instrument. I really don't want pin point accuracy, for me or anyone else.
endlessflood
Member
Haha, well yes 64 would be nice! But if they're struggling to get past 24 then I'm guessing 64 isn't quite doable yetAsmodai said:
AltogetherAndrews said:
Nothing wrong with highly accurate grenade launchers. They're difficult enough to learn that people usually won't abuse them. To this day, I remain convinced that I started the "noob tube" phenomenon in BF2 by nuking guys at long range in Strike at Karkand shortly after the game came out.
Soon enough people had given up on guns and were firing grenade launchers at each other randomly. Those were good times.
endlessflood said:Haha, well yes 64 would be nice! But if they're struggling to get past 24 then I'm guessing 64 isn't quite doable yet
Yeah, the internet speeds haven't improved enough yet. It was only smooth back then when you chose a server that was located conveniently close, which you could do because of the server lists.
Games with dedicated servers that don't have server lists with latency indications are stupid.
Problem is that DICE is never going to get 24 or more players to have the same smooth netcode with matchmaking that IW gets with 18 or less in the modern warfare games. The more players, the more lag, unfortunately. Dedicated servers help, but only if there are enough of them.
bluescreenoflife
Banned
gibonez said:
This is what the guido is trying to explain, everybody:
Using an F2000 under mounted grenade launcher.
mclaren777
Member
Like I said in that PAX write-up, people need to calm down about the inclusion of killcam. I used to passionately hate the idea as well, but in the four rounds I played it never bothered me once. And the game's producer is an avid sniper yet he still feels that killcam is a great new feature.AltogetherAndrews said:
elrechazado
Banned
Asmodai said:
Uhh, people have been doing that in every bf game ever. I think it's pretty funny that you think you innovated this though.
:lol
elrechazao said:
Hey, I played BF1942 since the start (which had no grenade launchers, incidentally), and Desert Combat most certainly did NOT have noob tubing, certainly not on the scale of BF2.
And who knows? The noob tubing in BF2 was started by someone. Could have been me! :lol
endlessflood
Member
If the 24 player limit is really a limit of internet connections and server grunt (as a result of destructible environments) then it stands to reason that PC's will have that limit in the same way that consoles do, right? Internet connections and server throughput are platform agnostic after all.
Also has some implications for Battlefield 3. Surely they'd take away destructible environments in that before they'd cut the player count?
Also has some implications for Battlefield 3. Surely they'd take away destructible environments in that before they'd cut the player count?
endlessflood said:
PCs have the dedicated server advantage, because PC servers can be amped up way, way more than console servers, which are PS3s and 360s. Throw 16 gigs of RAM and a bunch of GTX 295s into a server rig and I doubt any amount of destruction is going to give it serious problems.
On the internet connection front, you're right, they are limited by it. Unfortunately in the earlier battlefield games it was just a case of hoping that there's a good server relatively close to you, or it would be laggy.
endlessflood
Member
Really? I thought they just used standard PC servers housed in data centres for the consoles?Asmodai said:
AltogetherAndrews
Member
Asmodai said:
The grenade going where you want it to go isn't the same thing as having effortless accuracy.
As for the "noob tube" thing, I'm rather certain that long range grenade launcher shots are something that almost every player armed with one will try. I'm not going to tear down your world or anything, but it's not so much a matter of outside inspiration as it's a natural instinct.
The Faceless Master
Member
can't believe someone wants a laser dot to help with measuring the elevation needed to fire a mounted grenade launcher... what's next? a motion scanner that shows how far ahead to lead a sniper rifle shot on a moving target? 1 word dude: practice.
as far as player count goes, i've said it before, and i'll say it again, from playing way too much BC, 24 is great forGold Rush, but too little for Conquest, and it shows.
actually, that's one thing i noticed in the video, there were 3 control points, not 5, maybe that was done because it's only 12 a side...
as far as player count goes, i've said it before, and i'll say it again, from playing way too much BC, 24 is great for
actually, that's one thing i noticed in the video, there were 3 control points, not 5, maybe that was done because it's only 12 a side...