Mr. Redundant
Newbie
- Joined
- May 20, 2003
- Messages
- 4,446
- Reaction score
- 0
I hear what you are saying, games are too hyped, and more often times than not (if ever) they do not live up to that hype.
let's just put it this way, for me (my personal experience with the game) it surpassed the hype.
I am not a fan of BF1942 or BF:V, I own both and was dissapointed on both counts, I have DC too... but I don't like it.
and that is not a double standard, the difference is the way the engine is built, how it runs, how it looks, how it sounds, squads, teamwork, the feel of the infantry combat (this is a big thing, at least to me).
no it is not a revolutionary title, however the fact that this is the first game I have ever played where you can get on a public server, get into a squad and work effectively together... just blows me away.
I have been gaming forever, and I play everything... online FPS' just don't come this well structured and built with teamwork in mind, from having kits rely on eachother to spawning with your squad.
yes Splinter Cell had coop, where you had 1 other person with you. impressively handled but I don't see how that compares to getting on a large scale game like a 64 person match of BF2, and finding your niche, working together and really acting like a cohesive unit.
same thing goes for Rainbow Six... sure it had some good teamwork aspects... but imo the rest of the game was pewp.. which is why I didn't play it.
they weren't structured correctly, didn't have the whole package.
this (as you said) is not the first of it's kind, it is however the first game that does it all RIGHT.... at least to me.
DICE hired Trauma studios, but didn't they state it wasn't to work on BF2, but another project?
I am trying to understand how people can compare DC to BF2 (especially since as I stated I have a lot of experience with DC, and quite a few hours logged in BF2) they just aren't on the same level... be it from one addition or a complete overhaul.
then again I understand your cynicism, I felt the same way towards HL2 when it came out, because I was really expecting a lot out of it... and the year long delay didn't help.
with BF2 though (for me) I was expecting a lot, and thought that DICE a team that made BF1942, and BF:V couldn't pull off... and what blew me away is that they did. the loading times were shorter than HL2, and BF:V, the game ran better and looked better (that was especially impressive).
let's just put it this way, for me (my personal experience with the game) it surpassed the hype.
I am not a fan of BF1942 or BF:V, I own both and was dissapointed on both counts, I have DC too... but I don't like it.
and that is not a double standard, the difference is the way the engine is built, how it runs, how it looks, how it sounds, squads, teamwork, the feel of the infantry combat (this is a big thing, at least to me).
no it is not a revolutionary title, however the fact that this is the first game I have ever played where you can get on a public server, get into a squad and work effectively together... just blows me away.
I have been gaming forever, and I play everything... online FPS' just don't come this well structured and built with teamwork in mind, from having kits rely on eachother to spawning with your squad.
yes Splinter Cell had coop, where you had 1 other person with you. impressively handled but I don't see how that compares to getting on a large scale game like a 64 person match of BF2, and finding your niche, working together and really acting like a cohesive unit.
same thing goes for Rainbow Six... sure it had some good teamwork aspects... but imo the rest of the game was pewp.. which is why I didn't play it.
they weren't structured correctly, didn't have the whole package.
this (as you said) is not the first of it's kind, it is however the first game that does it all RIGHT.... at least to me.
DICE hired Trauma studios, but didn't they state it wasn't to work on BF2, but another project?
I am trying to understand how people can compare DC to BF2 (especially since as I stated I have a lot of experience with DC, and quite a few hours logged in BF2) they just aren't on the same level... be it from one addition or a complete overhaul.
then again I understand your cynicism, I felt the same way towards HL2 when it came out, because I was really expecting a lot out of it... and the year long delay didn't help.
with BF2 though (for me) I was expecting a lot, and thought that DICE a team that made BF1942, and BF:V couldn't pull off... and what blew me away is that they did. the loading times were shorter than HL2, and BF:V, the game ran better and looked better (that was especially impressive).