BFBC2 vs BF3?

[Smoblikat]

So I really enjoy a nice game of BF2, I like the entire setup of the game. How different is it to BF3? The way i see it is that BF3 = BF2, it just has jets. Kinda like MW2 vs MW3.

 

[NikolaeVarius]

I'm assuming that the title is wrong and you meant BF2 vs BF3.

BF3 is a completely different type of game from BF2. BF3 has better graphics, aside from the sun glare which is one of the worst features ever devised, but overall gameplay wise BF2 is much better.

Edit

Rereading the post, seems like you probably did mean BFBC2. They're different. BC2 had much better gunplay than BF3 because guns actually had recoil and thus took skills to use, while in BF3, recoil is heavily reduced. BF3 has 3 maps or so that are bigger than BC2 maps, but otherwise, the map sizes are pretty similar. Destruction is heavily toned down compared to BC2. In BC2 you could demolish most of the map, while you can't really do that in BF3

 

[Barfo]

Bc2 > bf3

 

[Coldkilla]

Dice ripped apart the Battlefield franchise formula with BF3. BF3 is essentially an unreleased BC3 with jets.

BF2 > BF1942 > BF2142 > BC2 > BF3.

 

[Smoblikat]

Thanks everyone, looks like ill just stick with my BC2. Might even pick up MW3.

 

[Clinkster]

BF3 is a sorry excuse for BF. BC2 is acceptable.

 

[exdeath]

Got my FPS military sim shooter kick with BF2. It was a great game, and I believe it's success is what started the current CoD this BF that silliness that has all but turned the game industry into shit.

Since then it's just been the same tired overhyped "US TOO!" dumbed down and milked to death.

 

[Destiny]

How different is it to BF3? The way i see it is that BF3 = BF2, it just has jets. Kinda like MW2 vs MW3.

Wrong in your comparision... BF3 has enough changes including better graphics/newer engine, vehicles than BF2.... MW3 IS MW2 with MW3 having new maps and new skins...

 

[Dkcode]

All the above is just opinion.

BF3 has far more attention to detail, a much better engine and the infantry combat is vastly improved. The position and quality of the weapon models, animations, textures, lighting and little things like being able to look down and see your legs make it feel right.

They spent a lot of time working on this and it shows.

It contains the same rush game mode as BC2 but with more variety in terms of a mix of vehicle and tight infantry maps. 64 player conquest is catered for but the star of the show in that regard is the excellent Back to Karkand expansion which is well worth picking up.

To dismiss BF3 based on the above comments would be a disservice to yourself as a gamer.

 

[Northern Lawn]

I think BF3 sucks and I thought I would love it. I've played over 1400 hours of BC2 and less then 20 hours of BF3.

 

[pugh]

All the above is just opinion.

BF3 has far more attention to detail, a much better engine and the infantry combat is vastly improved. The position and quality of the weapon models, animations, textures, lighting and little things like being able to look down and see your legs make it feel right.

They spent a lot of time working on this and it shows.

It contains the same rush game mode as BC2 but with more variety in terms of a mix of vehicle and tight infantry maps. 64 player conquest is catered for but the star of the show in that regard is the excellent Back to Karkand expansion which is well worth picking up.

To dismiss BF3 based on the above comments would be a disservice to yourself as a gamer.

Great game. Give it a try.

 

[DeadFred]

All the above is just opinion.

BF3 has far more attention to detail, a much better engine and the infantry combat is vastly improved. The position and quality of the weapon models, animations, textures, lighting and little things like being able to look down and see your legs make it feel right.

They spent a lot of time working on this and it shows.

It contains the same rush game mode as BC2 but with more variety in terms of a mix of vehicle and tight infantry maps. 64 player conquest is catered for but the star of the show in that regard is the excellent Back to Karkand expansion which is well worth picking up.

To dismiss BF3 based on the above comments would be a disservice to yourself as a gamer.

This ^

BF3 absolutely crushes BC2 in every way possible. Contrary to what has been posted in here by folks who may not have even played BF3 the player movements/controls and gunplay are second to none. I played BFBC2 and the Vietnam expansion plenty and would never want to go back after playing BF3. I have nearly 430 hours logged into BF3 and have enjoyed every minute.

Do yourself a favor and try the game and see for yourself.

 

[Veliko]

I played the pre-release alpha of Battlefield 1942, where there was a Rush mode set in Hitlers bunker.

Anything released after that is just dumbed down rubbish.

 

[JTsyo]

This ^

BF3 absolutely crushes BC2 in every way possible. Contrary to what has been posted in here by folks who may not have even played BF3 the player movements/controls and gunplay are second to none. I played BFBC2 and the Vietnam expansion plenty and would never want to go back after playing BF3. I have nearly 430 hours logged into BF3 and have enjoyed every minute.

Do yourself a favor and try the game and see for yourself.

BF3>BC2. Only thing they're missing is squad talk. They could even work around that by having a way to create a party with your squad but it doesn't look like they have any interest in addressing that issue.

 

[Sidekicknichola]

I loved BF2 more than any other game ever, then got out of PC gaming for a while (was too expensive to keep up while in school) so I played a bunch of BC/BC2 on ps3.... and now am back to PC gaming with BF3.

BF3 is better than all the others before it (given I playe BC2 on ps3).... it isn't a new blow your socks off addition, but they took all the things that made the previous games fun and made them better while adding some new things that I think improved the game as well.

If you have liked other BF games, you'll like BF3

 

[PrincessFrosty]

It's funny because BF2 was an amazing game, BC2 was never meant to be a direct competitor or advancement of the series but was well recieved on the PC by many, myself included.

Then BF3 was supposed to be the direct evolution from BF2 and did so many things wrong.

I personally see BC2 as the better game, the destruction was an evolution in game play which I totally didn't expect to be anything more than a gimmick, but which turned out to be something that made meaningful changes to the core gameplay.

BF3 despite the massive PR campaign to prove it wasn't consolized turned out to put consoles first anyway and missed out on a lot of what made BF2 (and 1942) so good. BC2 was one of the biggest surprises in recent gaming history, and BF3 was one of the biggest let downs, in large part just due to the expectations on both (none for BC2 and massive expctations for BF3).

 

[NikolaeVarius]

All the above is just opinion.

BF3 has far more attention to detail, a much better engine and the infantry combat is vastly improved. The position and quality of the weapon models, animations, textures, lighting and little things like being able to look down and see your legs make it feel right.

They spent a lot of time working on this and it shows.

It contains the same rush game mode as BC2 but with more variety in terms of a mix of vehicle and tight infantry maps. 64 player conquest is catered for but the star of the show in that regard is the excellent Back to Karkand expansion which is well worth picking up.

To dismiss BF3 based on the above comments would be a disservice to yourself as a gamer.

Who the hell cares if they have "detail" if the basic combat itself is a massive departure from the perfect balance of BF2.

Everyone in the entire game in BF3 has good medium to long range reach because everyone gets scopes and everyone has a low recoil weapons that have good accuracy afar. That's bad game design.

Infantry combat feels like Call of Duty on a larger scale. There is barely any penalty to dying, there is no disadvanage to not working with your squad, as you can spawn on anyone, no Commander, no assets to blow up, no uncaps to sneak around in wrecking havok, no inbuilt VOIP, they took about key weapons like the AT4, most of the maps are tiny, and the only maps that are even really worth playing are the ones that they copied from BF2, and even then they neutered those maps to be more casual.

Bad Company 2 at the very least, I didn't expect much from. While it didn't have all of the above from BF2, what I got was a game that has maps even bigger than most of BF3's maps, pretty damn decent balance, extremely fun mechanics such as tagging with the dart and shooting a rocket at him, a great feel to the destruction because most everyone was demolishable, and fun gameplay because at the very least combat had a decent about of flow to it. There isn't a single BF3 map thats as interesting as the desert MAP in BC2 with the criss-crossing through stranded ships or the city map with the giant port in the middle. BC2 had heart in it. BF3 is a sterile money grabber.

BF3 is a damn stunt by EA to get at the Call of Duty crowd. And it shows when the Demo is one of the worst maps in the history of shooters, and the first expansion is Call of Duty: Battleroom, with only close combat, and straight up "Domination" gametype from COD.

 

[Veliko]

Who the hell cares if they have "detail" if the basic combat itself is a massive departure from the perfect balance of BF2.

BF3 is a damn stunt by EA to get at the Call of Duty crowd. And it shows when the Demo is one of the worst maps in the history of shooters, and the first expansion is a Call of Duty, with close combat, and straight up "Domination"

As he said, this is all opinion.

There are plenty of former BF2/BFBC2 fans who prefer BF3.

 

[Harrod]

I like them both, that being said, if bc3 can do 64 players and they take out the jets I would be perfectly fine with that.

 

[ViviTheMage]

BF3 > BC2 >> BF2 > BF1942 >>>>>>>>>>> BF2142

I like BF3 a lot, played all of them, found BF2142 the worst...the mods for BF2 and 1942 were awesome, but they're dated now, and BF3 is enjoyable as hell. I cannot see myself going back to any of them, probably not even BC2 at this point.

 

[WiseUp216]

I've been playing the BF series since the beginning but I'm not one of these nostalgic party poopers.

BF3 is a good game. A very good game, in fact and better than BFBC2, IMO.

If it had come out with any other name than "Battlefield", much of this vitriol would not exist.

I love the people (not assuming anyone posting here) that flood the BF3 forums with nothing but hate and criticism, and then you look at their profile and they have logged 300, 400, 500+ hours.

Check it out and make up your own mind.

 

[Childs]

BF3 is more like BC3 than it is a successor to BF2, but that doesnt make it a bad game. If you like BC2 you should like BF3. The only BF2 specific features that are in BF3 is jets and 64 players. Otherwise its like BC2 with additional features.

 

[Barfo]

BF3 is more like BC3 than it is a successor to BF2, but that doesnt make it a bad game. If you like BC2 you should like BF3. The only BF2 specific features that are in BF3 is jets and 64 players. Otherwise its like BC2 with additional features.

No. I'm a big BC2 fan and I didn't like BF3.

 

[master_shake_]

ones crap and ones jewel encrusted crap??

 

[Childs]

No. I'm a big BC2 fan and I didn't like BF3.

I said "should", not "would". What didnt you like about it compared to BC2?