• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

New BF:Bad Company 2 trailer/screens

The Faceless Master said:
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...

I noticed that also. And it's something I think I actually mentioned in the 1943 thread that 5 bases to defend spreads you too thin and they maybe should offer a playlist option to drop to 3 or 4. (I think I said 4 but then somebody else pointed out you need an odd number of bases)
 
Stoney Mason said:
I noticed that also. And it's something I think I actually mentioned in the 1943 thread that 5 bases to defend spreads you too thin and they maybe should offer a playlist option to drop to 3 or 4. (I think I said 4 but then somebody else pointed out you need an odd number of bases)

Player count isn't going to change for BC2 so the idea of restructuring conquest doesn't really bother me. It would probably play quite a bit like War from the older CoD's where cap point locations are linear... one close to each team's initial spawn and then a highly contested mid-point.

I don't necessarily think you have to use an even number of points. Four points would work just as well. Even if both teams split the flags the game would still proceed but it'd be more akin to death match (contest of reserve depletion) until one of the teams could push through and capture an additional point.

Five points is probably too many for the player count, but three might not be enough... not enough use of the large maps. Seems like if you lowered it to 3 or four you could almost use the exact same map setup for either Gold Rush or Conquest. They'd almost both have to be pretty linearly designed...
 
recklessmind said:
Player count isn't going to change for BC2 so the idea of restructuring conquest doesn't really bother me. It would probably play quite a bit like War from the older CoD's where cap point locations are linear... one close to each team's initial spawn and then a highly contested mid-point.

I don't necessarily think you have to use an even number of points. Four points would work just as well. Even if both teams split the flags the game would still proceed but it'd be more akin to death match (contest of reserve depletion) until one of the teams could push through and capture an additional point.

Five points is probably too many for the player count, but three might not be enough... not enough use of the large maps. Seems like if you lowered it to 3 or four you could almost use the exact same map setup for either Gold Rush or Conquest. They'd almost both have to be pretty linearly designed...

Mostly agree. I think 3 is the right call for conquest. It concentrates the battles somewhat which is what you need with that lower player count. I'm glad to see DICE is making some of these calls. I glad they are seeing that to bring over the Battlefield experience you have to account for the differences between a PC and a console. The first few games didn't really do a good job of that but they seem to be learning everytime they put out a new one for the next title. Which is a good thing.
 
I'm in the camp that thought Recon was overpowered in BC1. With one kit you had:

1. an amazing long range weapon
2. an amazing short range weapon (pistol-which out guns assault and support guns in close quarters)
3. Motion sensors
4. A one hit tank killing missle with infinite ammo.

In the hands of a good player, it is the kit to pick in almost any situation. I'm glad there are custom kits though, I hope it brings more variety to the battle. That is, until 2 or 3 over powered weapons eventually rise to the top of the heap and everybody uses those guns regardless.

Also, I'm in support of kill cams, not because of the anti-sniping factor, but because I love seeing how I got killed. Nothing is more frustrating than not knowing how you died in my opinion. The fact that I have to move a little after a kill is non consequential. Besides, you can use a killcam to rope in scrubs all day just like the orange dot in the first game.

PLEASE put prone in DICE, there's nothing wrong with giving the player more control over his character.
 
Laser designator was extremely overpowered and I wouldn't mind if it was completely removed from the game.

Let specialists and engineers handle the tanks...
 
recklessmind said:
Laser designator was extremely overpowered and I wouldn't mind if it was completely removed from the game.

Let specialists and engineers handle the tanks...

Agreed. The laser designator made snipers the best anti-vehicle class as well as the best anti-personnel class. I didn't complain much, as I usually played sniper :lol , but it was horribly unbalancing.
 
Asmodai said:
Agreed. The laser designator made snipers the best anti-vehicle class as well as the best anti-personnel class. I didn't complain much, as I usually played sniper :lol , but it was horribly unbalancing.

Seemed like every time you climb into a vehicle you were immediately being targeted. I was never worried about rpgs or mines really... just concentrating on being able to break the line of sight of snipers. Frigging annoying. You can dodge the air strike most of the time but it's just a huge hassle. Maybe if it was once in a while... or like recon only got one strike... but unlimited never really felt right. Anyway... one of the things on the broken list.

As recon I would often set up on a vehicle chokepoint and as soon as my LD cooled down I would target a mostly dead, or unoccupied vehicle and just steer the missile toward an unsuspecting jeep/tank that would be coming down the road. They didn't even get a warning!

:lol :lol :lol

I don't always play fair... but I don't glitch or bunnyhop.
 
recklessmind said:
Seemed like every time you climb into a vehicle you were immediately being targeted. I was never worried about rpgs or mines really... just concentrating on being able to break the line of sight of snipers. Frigging annoying. You can dodge the air strike most of the time but it's just a huge hassle. Maybe if it was once in a while... or like recon only got one strike... but unlimited never really felt right. Anyway... one of the things on the broken list.

As recon I would often set up on a vehicle chokepoint and as soon as my LD cooled down I would target a mostly dead, or unoccupied vehicle and just steer the missile toward an unsuspecting jeep/tank that would be coming down the road. They didn't even get a warning!

:lol :lol :lol

I don't always play fair... but I don't glitch or bunnyhop.

Exactly, I don't remember being blown up by RPGs once, and mines were easy to see and avoid. But if you were in a tank anywhere in the map, there were always enough snipers that you would be perpetually targeted and just going flat out trying to outrun the air strike.

I targeted empty vehicles to nail infantry plenty of times. Not fair at all hahah. Similar to the tactic in Battlefield 2 where you fly up behind an enemy aircraft with your anti-ground radar on, so that they don't get the normal radar and missile lock warnings. Then you just shoot em down with the guns.
 
I think DICE is a great dev but sometimes they do stuff that just baffles me. I would love to be a fly on the wall in some of those meetings just to know (really know - not pr crap) why they make certain decisions.

People speculate but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt. Like maybe there is some reason that's not entirely evident. They play the game... they must realize the LD is not even close to balanced...
 
recklessmind said:
I think DICE is a great dev but sometimes they do stuff that just baffles me. I would love to be a fly on the wall in some of those meetings just to know (really know - not pr crap) why they make certain decisions.

People speculate but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt. Like maybe there is some reason that's not entirely evident. They play the game... they must realize the LD is not even close to balanced...

You played BF2, right? BF2 on the day it came out was a very, very different game than it was after being patched to hell and back.

Things were nerfed, buffed, and nerfed again so many times that even I, someone who played the game over like 3 years for 200 hours total, couldn't tell you what is nerfed and buffed right now.

What they did, unfortunately, was pander to the community. Every time someone shouted "omg this gun sucks its useless", they ran into to improve it, and obviously that starts up a whole new round of complaints.

Eventually, the snipers, who complain the most, managed to get it so that claymores were both invincible (couldn't be destroyed from range) and didn't kill teammates. Safe to say, that almost ruined the infantry combat right there. People would plant two claymores in a spot, like on Strike on Karkand, that the enemy had to go through to take the flag. After their claymores inevitably killed two or more enemies, they'd go and drop two more down, then return to hiding spot.

Despite this obviously killing the game and a torrent of complaints on the forums, DICE never put claymores back to their original state, to my knowledge. The only solution was to become a claymore whoring sniper myself. :lol

To DICE's credit, at some points, the patches were amazing. There was this one patch that made all of the weapons WAY more accurate than before, made the ground combat much better. But I think they were all nerfed back down again....the constant changes and lack of consistency made it really tough to stay interested in the game.
 
I think the lack of a Laser Designator on the sniper in Battlefield 1943 was why I enjoyed it so much. I could hope on a Tank and actually dominate. I felt well protected in a tank. At the same time I had to be aware of where the airplanes were.

I really hope they decide to not have Recon airstrikes in the BC2. That oneday between now and launch they decide to not include it.
 
c'mon people. it's not a guaranteed hit or even close to guaranteed when you're using the laser designator on a tank, and the startup and cooldown are long enough that a miss means that there should be casualties and/or damage to the crates you're defending. and dodging is a skill, and is all about timing the forward/reverse and using terrain to accelerate.

as far as classes go, yeah, recon kits are really good on defense. on offense even though they usually don't directly accomplish the goal, they're also ok.

as long as you have teammates who actually use the minimap, the motion detectors are amazing on defense.

as for fixes, it amazes me that DICE still hasn't fixed the artillery glitch, despite nerfing so many other things. also, has anyone noticed the new trend of people playing as a squad of all supports on maps with open crates, then dropping mortar strikes on them repeatedly? it only takes like 8 to take a crate out!

Stoney Mason said:
I noticed that also. And it's something I think I actually mentioned in the 1943 thread that 5 bases to defend spreads you too thin and they maybe should offer a playlist option to drop to 3 or 4. (I think I said 4 but then somebody else pointed out you need an odd number of bases)
yeah, i believe it was me who said you need an odd number of bases...
 
I see on the BF1943 ticker that the PC version of '43 is going to get 32 players. Have DICE actually confirmed that BFBC2 will only be 24 players?
 
The LD was terrible, hop in a vehicle and before you even get close to the enemy, you hear beepbeepbeep. Yes you *can* avoid it, but having to do a little 4th wall breaking countdown until you suddenly jerk your vehicle in the other direction is just stupid and not something I want in a BF game.
 
Vercingetorix said:
Battlefield games have always had dedicated servers. Battlefield 1942 had the least laggy servers that I've ever played to this day, ironically enough. Despite having way worse internet back then too.

yeah you know, cod games always had dedicated servers too. i am just glad that dice doesn't change it because bf game are by far my most favorite mp games.

Now if only the PC version of 1943 would come out.

yeah i was really po'd when they delayed it.
 
Is it worthwhile going back and playing the first Bad Company? It looks like its going for a pretty decent price now.... (of course with all the other crap coming out, I dont know if I should bother)
 
Yes, the game is FANTASTIC. Truly, IMHO, the best FPS engine out there.

quick edit : ummm, dont know about single player mode. Had the game since it came out last year and I STILL haven't touched single player. Online is where its at.
 
http://www.thebitbag.com/2009/10/22/electronic-arts-makes-a-180-degree-turn-around/
Last week I had the pleasure of attending the Naughty Or Nice EA event in NY. I knew what was in store for me but I didn’t realize that what I was going to see would more than live up to my expectations. I’ve been a fan of Electronic Arts since the Mail Order Monster days. They’ve been up and down over the years in my books. After seeing their new offerings I can honestly say that EA is living up to their name once again.

When I first walked into the Naughty lounge I looked to my left and nearly lost it. I saw Battlefield Bad Company 2 in all it’s full glory. The moment I laid eyes on this game, nothing else mattered. Not Left 4 Dead 2, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 2 or Dante’s Inferno. I was dumb struck. Once EA PR sat me down and I got my hands on a controller, I wasn’t getting up unless they asked me too.

Two things happened in the next 35min. First, all the excitement I had for Modern Warfare 2 just vanished. All of the mystery surrounding BFBC2 was gone. DICE had taken me further than Infinity Ward. They had nothing to hide and wasn’t forcing me to wait until the game was released to get a taste.

The second thing that happened was surreal. It was almost as if I was playing a next generation game. Remember when you saw your first 360 or PS3 game? Yeah, that’s the feeling I’m talking about. They could have easily told me it was on PS4 or X3 and I would have accepted it. Everything you’ve seen in the trailers is gameplay quality. There’s no smoke and mirrors, no loss of parity between cut scenes and gameplay and no bullshit. DICE is going to own 2010 with this game and sadly that’s all I can say about it until embargo breaks. Enjoy MW2, we all will, but make sure you get yourself a copy of BFBC2 next March so your face can melt into oblivion.


If anyone knows when this embargo ends, let me know.
 
gibonez said:
I think the lack of a Laser Designator on the sniper in Battlefield 1943 was why I enjoyed it so much. I could hope on a Tank and actually dominate. I felt well protected in a tank. At the same time I had to be aware of where the airplanes were.

I really hope they decide to not have Recon airstrikes in the BC2. That oneday between now and launch they decide to not include it.

but this is the thing (from my perspective) you aren't SUPOSED to be just able to hop in a tank and dominate, you should have to use combined arms, you should have to get some friends to screen for potential snipers lurking in the bushes and taking care of other AT specialized players

a tank (or any other vehicle) should just give you a difrent aproach to handle a situation, something that isn't avalible on foot (not better OR worse, but just difrent), but you shouldn't be able to dominate by yourself
 
I never really got into battlefield, but is there a game mode 6vs6 or 8vs8 infantry mode? I mean vehicles are fun, but i'm more into skill based infantry shooters with medium sized maps, does this have that?
 
tHoMNZ said:
I never really got into battlefield, but is there a game mode 6vs6 or 8vs8 infantry mode? I mean vehicles are fun, but i'm more into skill based infantry shooters with medium sized maps, does this have that?

there are infantry only servers (either through a server choice that actualy dissables the vehicles (I know BF2142 has those, no idea about the others) or just plain old "server XY, NO VEHICLES ALOWED!!11" where the vehicles are still around but no one is alowed to use them (in theory)), player count goes from 16-64 on those iirc, given the size of BF maps 32 is kinda the sweet spot from my expiriance
 
PedroLumpy said:
The LD was terrible, hop in a vehicle and before you even get close to the enemy, you hear beepbeepbeep. Yes you *can* avoid it, but having to do a little 4th wall breaking countdown until you suddenly jerk your vehicle in the other direction is just stupid and not something I want in a BF game.
i always thought it was a fair trade, considering how much damage a tank can do in a short time, especially to gold crates. i've played both sides of the coin many times, and it really only takes one miss to get that crate you were defending so well for so long wrecked.
 
tHoMNZ said:
I never really got into battlefield, but is there a game mode 6vs6 or 8vs8 infantry mode? I mean vehicles are fun, but i'm more into skill based infantry shooters with medium sized maps, does this have that?
there is no infantry only mode, but there are a few maps with a minimum amount of vehicles.



gold rush maps:

on ascension, the offense has one jeep on the first set of crates, then no vehicles after.

on over and out, the offense has no vehicles on the first two sections and a small tank on the final section.

on deconstruction, the offense has one small tank on all three sections, and the defense has one on the second and third sections.



conquest maps:

acta non verba has no vehicles, it's infantry only

ascension has a humvee and a russian equivalent vehicle.
 
Someone on YouTube who posted a video of the game, said that he talked to one of the reps and they said the beta should be available either in October or the start of November. :D I don't have $ for MW2 so this would work perfect. Plus only the true fans would be playing. All the annoying kids will be playing MW2.
 
Kibbles said:
Someone on YouTube who posted a video of the game, said that he talked to one of the reps and they said the beta should be available either in October or the start of November. :D I don't have $ for MW2 so this would work perfect. Plus only the true fans would be playing. All the annoying kids will be playing MW2.

PC beta too?

oh and you can play more than 1 game btw^^
 
Enosh said:
PC beta too?

oh and you can play more than 1 game btw^^
Yeah, obviously. I would get MW2 if I had the money for it right now, but I don't. This would tide me over until I get money, instead of being jealous about all those who'll be playing MW2. I'll still play the beta after I get MW2 as well. I'd play both.
 
Kibbles said:
Someone on YouTube who posted a video of the game, said that he talked to one of the reps and they said the beta should be available either in October or the start of November. :D I don't have $ for MW2 so this would work perfect. Plus only the true fans would be playing. All the annoying kids will be playing MW2.

I'm confused. You say in this post that you won't be playing MW2, but then you say that all the annoying kids will be playing MW2.

Only annoying kids would make stupid generalizations like that, so obviously you're an annoying kid and will be playing MW2.

I've been a fan of Battlefield since 1942 came out. Don't give Battlefield fans a bad name with this fanboy bullshit. Thank you.
 
The Faceless Master said:
i always thought it was a fair trade, considering how much damage a tank can do in a short time, especially to gold crates. i've played both sides of the coin many times, and it really only takes one miss to get that crate you were defending so well for so long wrecked.

Well yeah if there's no one else on your team interested in defending. But that's not the important bit, the point is that the dynamic isn't fun. Hopping in a vehicle only to have the missile warning pop up as soon as you leave the base is a largely passive experience that punishes a player for driving out of the base. It's simply not fun. Compare that to fighting a guy with a RPG. Your both actively engaged in trying to kill each other. Die in a tank then and you get punished for say, driving into an enemy town without clearing out buildings. Or maybe simply for having shitty aim, but at least you were doing something. It's far more rewarding and fun system.

The big question though is what Dice will do with it I guess. Can't remember, are there any details on how/if the LD will be integrated into BC2
 
Kibbles said:
Someone on YouTube who posted a video of the game, said that he talked to one of the reps and they said the beta should be available either in October or the start of November. :D I don't have $ for MW2 so this would work perfect. Plus only the true fans would be playing. All the annoying kids will be playing MW2.

All the annoying kids generally don't get their games till the holidays so your hopes may be shattered. I wish this game was out now.
 
Vercingetorix said:
I'm confused. You say in this post that you won't be playing MW2, but then you say that all the annoying kids will be playing MW2.

Only annoying kids would make stupid generalizations like that, so obviously you're an annoying kid and will be playing MW2.

I've been a fan of Battlefield since 1942 came out. Don't give Battlefield fans a bad name with this fanboy bullshit. Thank you.
:lol I wasn't talking about MW2 fans in general. I was talking about the annoying little kids on Xbox Live. I'm going to be one of the people playing MW2 as well. When I said annoying kids, I meant it quite literally. I wasn't generalizing anyone. I didn't say all of the people playing will be annoying kids, I said all the annoying kids will be playing that.



Anyway... Impressions of BFBC2 from the recent event supposedly start at 15min in this podcast - http://www.thebitbag.com/2009/10/17/video-game-warzone-63/
 
Kibbles said:
:lol I wasn't talking about MW2 fans in general. I was talking about the annoying 12 year olds. I'm going to be one of the people playing MW2 as well. When I said annoying kids, I meant it quite literally. I wasn't generalizing anyone. I didn't say all of the people playing will be annoying kids, I said all the annoying kids will be playing that.

Annoying kids play every game out there, unfortunately. I've encounted plenty of them playing Halo 3 and Gears 1 and 2 online.

I apologize if you legitimately didn't mean that as a fanboyish denigration, but it sure seemed like that to me. It's kind of a standard gamefaqs thing to say "oh, all the stupid kids play COD/Halo/Gears while the discerning, mature gamers play the game I say is good.

Anyway, the game is looking great, personally I hope they tighten up the controls, vehicle balance, and lethality/accuracy of the weapons.
 
Vercingetorix said:
Annoying kids play every game out there, unfortunately. I've encounted plenty of them playing Halo 3 and Gears 1 and 2 online.

I apologize if you legitimately didn't mean that as a fanboyish denigration, but it sure seemed like that to me. It's kind of a standard gamefaqs thing to say "oh, all the stupid kids play COD/Halo/Gears while the discerning, mature gamers play the game I say is good.

Anyway, the game is looking great, personally I hope they tighten up the controls, vehicle balance, and lethality/accuracy of the weapons.
Yeah, sorry I can see how my post could've been taken that way. I did not mean it that way though. MW2 is the next big game, all the hype is around it, so a lot of the Xbox Live population will be playing it. Unfortunately along with the good there is a lot of bad, and that's what I was referring to. I'm sure 95% of my friends will be playing it upon release. I'll find a way to get it, maybe I'll trade in some stuff. I'm just saying if the beta for BFBC2 were to be released then, most of those "annoying kids" should be on MW2 during that time.
 
I see what you're saying, and I'm kind of worried about that trend myself. Back in 2007, me and my friends were kind of the ones supporting the underdog by thinking that COD4 would be better than Halo 3. Halo 3 was the big marketing blitz game, Halo 3 was the game every kid wanted for Christmas. So COD4 was kind of like the alternate choice.

This time the tables are turned, and MW2 is the most popular shooter, and that means that (regrettably) the kids will probably be pouring in. Hopefully they don't poison the community too much, and if they do, there's always the global non-friend mute option! (best option ever!)

Ironically enough I had more fun with the Bad Company beta than I did with the final game. Well, the beta and the demo, since a lot more of my friends played the demo then played the final game.
 
This is a quote from one of their community manager zerk:

Alright Sulla, here is a discussion on the issue from DICE's viewpoint on a range of topics.

DICE feels that because the console versions of the game is at such a lower resolution (1280x720), compared to PC resolutions (as high as 2560x1600), that prone was breaking the fast paced action of the game and that it was too camper friendly. When DICE played with prone on consoles other players were nearly impossible to see while prone (until it was too late), and the matches often resulted in a camping festival between the defending team and the attacking team, complete with smores and campfire songs. The overall atmosphere felt slow, and the game wasn’t at its full fast-paced potential. When DICE played the matches with the prone turned off, it forced camping players to put more thought into their hiding spots, and it gave the attackers less of a disadvantage being able to see who was shooting at them and resulted in more fast paced gameplay. People like yourself can go on and on about how in real life prone is the most important battle stance in a firefight, but obviously this isn’t real life, and you should play ARMA2 or something if you really want it, or purchase the PC version .

Now, the reasons the PC platform are getting seemingly “better” features in the game are a result of DICE ignoring the PC user base for the past 3-4 years and this is a homage to the PC platform, and also because it’s a lot of things that PC users simply deserve. If you have played games on the PC for the last ten years you would know what I’m talking about, otherwise I won’t even try to explain... Also, k1ll8 saurav is completely correct about the difference of player’s between PC and consoles, and dedicated servers for PC’s are a must for any game like this on a PC platform, so don’t take it the wrong way. I don’t know DICE’s stance on clan support for the console version at this time, they have been back and forth on the topic and I don’t know why. If I find out I’ll let you know

Regarding player count on the pc…PC’s for obvious reason have much more powerful tech, thus allowing much more flexibility with things such as increased player count, so it would be flat out stupid to not take advantage of this and make the game more worthy of being on the PC instead of a direct port from a console version. You may say that this isn’t fair, but it really is and everything balances out (hey, we don’t get a slick Xbox LIVE interface and if I wanted that then I should play the xbox version). If you wanted a more powerful game, you should have bought a more powerful platform, plain and simple.

Prone- I don’t consider prone a real feature to get all excited about for the PC version, but I suppose people like you have proven me wrong. Regardless, as of right now prone is not going to be on the console version and I gave the reasons above.

Last but not least, the PC platform is usually expected to put up with a lot more “crap” compared to consoles. While consoles may get the game on a certain date, PC users typically have to wait much longer for the same game, but in turn, they get the game for a lower price because there are no licensing fees like consoles have, and typically they get a few more perks thrown in compared to consoles just for good measure. PC customers are a much tougher crowd then consoles are so we have to appeal to them in as many ways as possible, but why not? They deserve it after having a steady history of constantly getting the shaft. Also on a side note, If it wasn’t for the PC platform you wouldn’t be playing the game on consoles right now.

Anyway, regarding prone -because there is still plenty of dev time, there is a slim chance in can end up implemented in the game... but because of the reasons I stated above I want to emphasize that it is definitely a slim chance.

This doesnt make any sense.. you can camp all you like in crouching position. and also everyone will be able to prone. there is a lot of things they can do to balance this out. how about for one, increase the splash damage of nades and rockets instead being a door opener in BC1. besides with a kill cam, this wont be an issue.
 
957916_20091029_screen001.jpg

957916_20091029_screen002.jpg

957916_20091029_screen003.jpg

957916_20091029_screen004.jpg

957916_20091029_screen005.jpg

957916_20091029_screen006.jpg


http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/battlefieldbadcompany2/images.html
 
I'm going to need a card with more VRAM...

Will the 2 gigabyte versions of the 5840/5870 be out by then or will the one gigabyte ones actually be able to handle that due to GDDR5?

I'm still on a 4850, so I'm curious before I go about upgrading.
 
Top Bottom