Bonehead
Joined: Dec 29, 2010
Posts: 54
Location: San Diego, Ca
First impressions.... It looks great, but it's more like BFBC2 or MW than BF2. There are a lot of little things I'm not going to mention because it's still only in Alpha and I don't think we are seeing anything close to what we will get in the full version.
The Good:
-The graphics look Great! Almost like Crysis.
-The weapons seem to be nicely balanced, although I have heard a lot of grumbling from the snipers, no 1 shot kills.
-Player movement feels better than BFBC2, not as sluggish I guess.
-The knife works, unlike BFBC2.
-It runs really smooth for me, I haven't had any lag at all. I was actually shocked at how smooth it was after playing BFBC2.
The Bad:
-No battlefield commander. This was one of the things that made BF2 different than all the other FPS.
-Squad leader can't give orders. No commo rose. This makes playing as a squad much harder.
-Only 4 man squads, not the 6 man squads from back in BC2.
-You can spawn on anyone in your squad, not just the squad leader. That is when the spawning works. The not working right part I think is just because it is still in Alpha and not fully functioning
yet.
-3D spotting. Once a player has been spotted by the other team it doesn't matter where they go they still have a marker over their head. So even if you find cover the other team knows where you are, through buildings, behind rocks, etc.
-Players and vehicles regenerate health, making medics and engineers less valuable. To me this takes away from the team work aspect that made BF2 so great.
-The attacking side seems to be at a huge disadvantage. I have only seen the last section of the map a hand full of times, and have only seen the attacking team win about 3 times. I think this is mostly because there just isn't enough squad play.
-To me they really killed the best parts of BF2, the squad play, and made it just like COD/MW/BFBC2. It's a way faster game style where everyone seems to be more worried about their KDR than keeping the squad alive and getting the mission accomplished.
Overall I think it will be a fun game, but I am more than a little disappointed in the way they killed what, to me, were the best parts of BF2. BF2 was, and still is, the only FPS I have ever played that really rewarded squad play. You don't see medics risking their life to revive players now, if you can find one to revive you at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the game at all and I'm sure I will buy it, but to me they should have named it BFBC3 not BF3.
Oh and on a side note..... Sorry I haven't been around in a while, real life stuff has seemed to put a big hold on my gaming. I don't think I have played more than a few min of any game in the last few months until I got the Alpha invite. Hopefully this will be changing really soon and I can jump back in with both feet.
The Good:
-The graphics look Great! Almost like Crysis.
-The weapons seem to be nicely balanced, although I have heard a lot of grumbling from the snipers, no 1 shot kills.
-Player movement feels better than BFBC2, not as sluggish I guess.
-The knife works, unlike BFBC2.
-It runs really smooth for me, I haven't had any lag at all. I was actually shocked at how smooth it was after playing BFBC2.
The Bad:
-No battlefield commander. This was one of the things that made BF2 different than all the other FPS.
-Squad leader can't give orders. No commo rose. This makes playing as a squad much harder.
-Only 4 man squads, not the 6 man squads from back in BC2.
-You can spawn on anyone in your squad, not just the squad leader. That is when the spawning works. The not working right part I think is just because it is still in Alpha and not fully functioning
yet.
-3D spotting. Once a player has been spotted by the other team it doesn't matter where they go they still have a marker over their head. So even if you find cover the other team knows where you are, through buildings, behind rocks, etc.
-Players and vehicles regenerate health, making medics and engineers less valuable. To me this takes away from the team work aspect that made BF2 so great.
-The attacking side seems to be at a huge disadvantage. I have only seen the last section of the map a hand full of times, and have only seen the attacking team win about 3 times. I think this is mostly because there just isn't enough squad play.
-To me they really killed the best parts of BF2, the squad play, and made it just like COD/MW/BFBC2. It's a way faster game style where everyone seems to be more worried about their KDR than keeping the squad alive and getting the mission accomplished.
Overall I think it will be a fun game, but I am more than a little disappointed in the way they killed what, to me, were the best parts of BF2. BF2 was, and still is, the only FPS I have ever played that really rewarded squad play. You don't see medics risking their life to revive players now, if you can find one to revive you at all. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing the game at all and I'm sure I will buy it, but to me they should have named it BFBC3 not BF3.
Oh and on a side note..... Sorry I haven't been around in a while, real life stuff has seemed to put a big hold on my gaming. I don't think I have played more than a few min of any game in the last few months until I got the Alpha invite. Hopefully this will be changing really soon and I can jump back in with both feet.
