The only good thing about Sniper Elite was the bullet cam. Everything else was very poorly done. Thankfully I didn't pay much for it.
Upvote
0
The "games you regret having bought" thread
- Thread starter Fedorov
- Start date
The bullet cam feature is cut in Germany.
Maybe those who thought it sucked played the German version?
(or shooting fuel-tank caps to blow up tanks wasn't convincing enough for them...)
I also regret Phantom Crash. I thought it was a kind of pure arena version of Mechwarrior but it was just a mess.
Maybe those who thought it sucked played the German version?
(or shooting fuel-tank caps to blow up tanks wasn't convincing enough for them...
)I also regret Phantom Crash. I thought it was a kind of pure arena version of Mechwarrior but it was just a mess.
Upvote
0
I thought sniper elite was alright as it goes - *force thou, not good.
Got it on xbox however as well which i think is probably a more situable platform anyway.
Got it on xbox however as well which i think is probably a more situable platform anyway.
Upvote
0
Bullet damage. That's the only valid complaint you have I think. The rest are abstractions to achieve an end. Sorry, I don't get why you're so butt hurt over it. Saying TF2 is true to itself somehow makes the ridiculous graphics, even more ridiculous game play, and masturbatory upgrade scheme more playable?
If you didn't like it because it wasn't realistic enough, I can buy that. I think you're off in lala-land though, as far as complaining about most of the mechanics. Because they haven't changed, in most new releases, and most borrow heavily from what BF2 set up. Plus, I can't help but laugh at someone who criticizes a game for not being realistic enough when TF2 suffices. Saying it's ok because TF2 is honest about what it is reeks of fanboism. As if it's fair to judge TF2 on what it does well, but somehow BF2 doesn't deserve the same treatment. Sounds more like just pure hatin' to me.
Here, I'll show you what a balanced assessment can look like.
"TF2 has a great thing going because it's willing to break all the balance rules when it comes to class, weapon and item design, which can result in some really fun FPS game play you don't get anywhere else. YMMV on the overall art style and finesse of the game though."
"BF2 still offers better organized squad play than most FPS out today. It's still the only FPS that features flyable jets. The maps are huge, you'll never want for an upgrade goal and few things compare to a 32 vs. 32 battle. However, it's always had some rocky handling, questionable hit detection and a few things like claymores that were never balanced, so again YMMV."
Last edited:
Upvote
0
You forgot BF2's rank up unlock system and those who bought special forces had access to some better kits.
Upvote
0
SF got you the second set of unlocks, in the beginning. Afterward, all it got you was flashbangs, because they gave everyone the unlocks.
Upvote
0
No offense, but I honestly don't give a crap what you think is valid or not. I don't like BF2, I explained the reasons why and if you don't like them or don't think they're valid, that's just too damn bad for you.
And considering I'm not the only person in this thread who doesn't like BF2 for similar reasons..... I think a little more is "Valid" then you believe.
As in any video game, it's not up to the developers or marketers to determine for me or anybody what we will like or not..... we the consumers determine this.... for whatever selfish reasons we may have, they're our reasons none the less.
Then let me spell it out in more simpler terms for you to "Get it":
I bought a game I didn't enjoy, found annoying, had a lot of technical and gameplay issues I didn't like, have no interest in playing and therefore was a complete waste of my money.
^ Clear enough for you?
I don't remember saying which one was more playable in general..... for me personally, I enjoy TF2 far more then BF2, because if I want to have a game I can have fun with and laugh at from time to time because of how ridiculous it is, I'll play TF2......
..... If I want to play a realistic FPS that is supposed to represent real-life combat, using real-life weapons and vehicles, there's a hell of a lot more of those games out there for me to choose from that puts BF2 to shame.... which I enjoy more.
Your views are different from mine.... you don't like TF2 but like BF2. All the power to you girlfriend, you have your own views and opinions and if you think TF2 is the worst piece of crap to ever exist, so be it.
Who am I to tell you the game isn't the worst piece of crap to ever exist in your eyes?
I'm not you.
Therefore, where do you get off standing on your soap box and finger pointing at my personal opinion, likes/dislikes as if they're in the wrong and therefore trying to attempt a defense for a game I still won't like no matter what is said?
For me, it still sucks hardcore...... for you it doesn't.... for my ex-room mate it doesn't..... so be it.
Now that's a load... you speak as if BF2 was the first FPS Combat Video Game to ever exist and therefore anything found similar in other games must have taken their traits from BF2.
You seem to forget that many things BF2 uses was taken from already existing FPS games before its time, so don't try and act as though BF2 was some revolutionary video game that changed the future because it wasn't.
Sure there are probably a few traits of BF2 that were unique to BF2 at the time that might have been adopted by other games..... but BF2 isn't the only game that had this happen to and doesn't make BF2 somehow more special then any other game.
First Person Shooters take a lot from other First Person Shooters.... big whoop.
Obviously you didn't get the point being made.
I never once said TF2 was realistic.... is isn't supposed to be realistic, nor does it try to pass as a realistic FPS.... that's what makes it unique and that's why trying to compare TF2 to BF2 is pretty stupid because they're two very different styles of FPS.
But over the years and from many people making claims, I've heard over and over that this was supposed to be a great realism game (BF2) and how cool the large maps and large player base and cool vehicles and jets were.... but the arcadey application of the weapons, collisions, hit boxes and many of the weapons being just as unrealistic as say TF2, does not warrant me calling this game "Realistic" compared to other games like Day of Defeat, Call of Duty, Red Orchestra, and even Medal of Honor.
But that's just my opinion.
Yay, more 733t speek terminology to prove yourself right.
You're completely missing the point I was trying to make.
Trying to compare TF2 to BF2 makes about as much sense as trying to compare Need For Speed Carbon to Tetris. Sure TF2 and BF2 are first person shooters, but for the most part, that's where the similarities end because each game focuses on different avenues of the FPS genre.
When I just want to have fun playing a game and have a good laugh, I'll play TF2...... when I want to play a realistic FPS relating to realistic combat, I'll play Call of Duty, Far Cry 2, Red Orchestra or something similar to those..... BF2 doesn't even register in either categories for me.
That's the point.
The thread is about the games we regret buying, for whatever reason...... I regret buying Battlefield 2 and I clearly explained the reasons why, whether you like those reasons or not.
Are my reasons for why I regret buying BF2 "Pure Hatin?"
Considering I clearly explained how much I "HATE" the game and have no interest in ever playing it again..... that kind of makes sense, doesn't it?
Should I be ashamed that I hate a particular game and regret wasting my money on it?
No.
That's not a balanced assessment, that sounds like your opinion being expressed by using sarcasm.
Was what I posted a balanced assessment?
No.... probably because I wasn't trying to give a balanced assessment in the first place, but rather I was giving my own personal opinion.
Claiming TF2 "Breaks all the Balance Rules" is opinion, not a balanced assessment.... but if that's your opinion so be it.
If it's supposed to be a balanced assessment, then you failed, because in that regard I have visited the TF2 Valve forums for a period of time and I have seen just how nit-picky the gamers AND the developers are when it comes to balance...... almost to an insane level.
Balance in Team Fortress has always been a main issue of concern for everybody all the way back to the original TF mod for Quake...... in fact, TF has been one of the biggest pioneer for class based FPS games which your precious BF2 uses today.... different classes with different skills and abilities. Before TF became mainstream, most FPS's gave everybody the same weapons, the same speeds and abilities and the only real difference was perhaps the uniform you were allowed to wear...... but in the end it was just a multiplayer death match with two teams at best, racking up kill points.
However, where Team Fortress tried it's best to keep the game balanced while giving a stark contrast between classes..... BF2 pretty well made every class almost identical in just about every aspect except for how a couple of weapons work, in order to keep balance stable..... but at the expense of any noticeable variety between classes.
It's decent, although slightly overkill that you require one player on each team to sit out from actually playing in order to command their teams on a GUI because it's so cumbersome to keep track of everything that's going on.
Not very appealing to me, personally.
Not much of a priority obviously, otherwise all other games would be jumping at the chance to toss in flying jets.
Oh.... and did you forget about the Unreal games having flying vehicles, or are you purposely just focusing on jets?
The jets in BF2 aren't that appealing to me either, considering within about 10 seconds of flying you're at the other end of the map and forced to turn back or die..... but that's just me. If Jets in a game were that appealing to me, I'd buy a combat flight simulator, not a FPS game.
Sure, the maps are huge.... they need to be in order to make the jets worthwhile having in the game, but I can have just as much fun in a 12vs12, 16vs16, 24vs24 match as I would with 32vs32..... that's not really much of an advantage.... for me anyways. It's not about how many people you can cram on a map, it's about how much fun you can have with who your playing with, regardless of how many you're playing with.
And you call the two above examples of yours "Balanced Assessments?"
For TF2 you focused on what you felt were the negatives, but in a sarcastic positive attitude.... but with BF2, you provided more pros and fewer cons while trivializing the cons.
That's not balanced and reminds me more of the type of spin I'd expect from a Fox news broadcast.
Look.... as I have said already, I like TF2, you like BF2.... I hate BF2 and you hate TF2. We each have our own reasons why, regardless if either of us think they're justified or not, they're our reasons.
Why can't you just leave it at that and move on?
Why do you continually have to come in here and try and defend something I'm still not going to end up liking?
I played it for over a year and a half..... if I was going to like it ever, I would have liked it by now and no amount of your arguments are going to change that.
And I already know that no amount of argument from me defending TF2 is going to change your view, which is why I haven't been trying to really defend TF2 from your opinions in the first place.... because it's a waste of time.
We all like what we all like for our own reasons.... move on.
No one game will ever satisfy everybody who tries it..... and no matter how fantastic or ingenious a game may be.... there will always be people who are not impressed or simply don't like it.
Added:
Maybe you should re-assess who you think is the one Butt-Hurt over all this.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
tbh i didn't really go through that ^ cos it's not my argument but if prax is kinda saying that he likes tf2 because, although it's obviously not as realistic as BF, at least it works very well at what it tries to do, whereas BF fails in areas where he expects a game like that to do better, then i understand that attitude.
This is kinda the issue i have with cod nowadays: however i like(d) BF2 - at least it had the scope for me survive on my wits to some extent, and more importantly - it's fun.
I kinda have periods when i enjoy TF2 a lot - particularly when co-operating with freinds, and then i go cold for a bit.
It's a bit like golf: when your playing well it's very rewarding, but when your having a bad round it's the most frustrating thing ever.
1 thing about both those games though - there's a fair bit of content there now - you can't regret buying them through lack of content or support in the past.
This is kinda the issue i have with cod nowadays: however i like(d) BF2 - at least it had the scope for me survive on my wits to some extent, and more importantly - it's fun.
I kinda have periods when i enjoy TF2 a lot - particularly when co-operating with freinds, and then i go cold for a bit.
It's a bit like golf: when your playing well it's very rewarding, but when your having a bad round it's the most frustrating thing ever.
1 thing about both those games though - there's a fair bit of content there now - you can't regret buying them through lack of content or support in the past.
Upvote
0
Exactly.... nothing more, nothing less really.
My expectations of TF2 were fulfilled because not only have I played the others in the past to know what it's like and thus I knew what I was getting into, but nobody I talked to, no reviews, nothing from the developers ever told me the game was going to be different from what I expected.
But with BF2, the only other references to base my expectations on this game was other similar FPS's that touch on the Genre that BF2 was geared for........ Call of Duty games, Red Orchestra, Day of Defeat..... and while Day of Defeat's gameplay isn't very realistic, the weapons abilities in the game to take you down quickly and the lack of med kits or insta-revive paddles was realistic.
If I were to create two FPS Categories, I would place TF2 with the Quake, Doom and Unreal FPS's.... which is about eye candy and fancy unrealistic moves and weapons.
And I would put BF2 with the Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Red Orchestra, Soldier of Fortune, Day of Defeat FPS's...... and in this category and in my personal opinion, BF2 is the worst of them all and just doesn't compete.
Yes, BF2 has some interesting features and traits that are unique or outright impressive, such as large maps and more then just ground fighting.... but it's just not enough to keep my interest in the game due to the other drawbacks in the game that ruin it for me.
IMO, BF2 tried to be too complicated and offer over-killed team-work-communication & massive maps, while not focusing on the real FPS details that make a FPS great... which are accurate hitboxes, effective weapons & tools, unique contrasting classes, and immersion.
When I load up BF2 and play, it feels more like a Arcade Simulator then an Action FPS.
Yeah I'm the same way.... I haven't played TF2 in months and should update my avatar, but I imagine I'll get back into it soon enough.
Well for me in regards to BF2.... the mods and content are just so bloated and large in file size, take forever to download and take just as long to install, which honestly has had another affect of my ability to give BF2 any more of a chance then I have. I downloaded Project Realty and a couple of other mods in the past, waited forever for them to download and install and when I started playing them, I noticed no real improvement or difference from what I was already playing with vanilla BF2.
I don't mind Special Ops that much, as the anti-tank with grappling hook is pretty fun.... but again, after a bit, I lose interest and waiting for my points to gradually get me up in rank to unlock more content still takes an eternity...... and many of the technical issues I had with BF2 still remain.
TF2 I got on discount during last years Steam X-Mas special (which was also when I finally picked up Ostfront)..... it's certainly a lot more different from TFC and there are a few things I'm not a big fan of, but the variety, the ever-expanding content, the more "skin-of-your-teeth" team work involved and the so much more expanded ability to customize your attack style/weapons does make it worth the money I spent and I have no regrets getting TF2.
The other thing that leaves a bad taste in my mouth with BF2 is that I paid full price.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Someone should tell Praxius that writing 2,000 words doesn't give you a point. Your opinion isn't sacrosanct because it's an opinion. You're just as capable of having what I think is a misguided opinion, as you are typing. I'm not going bother quote picking, since you just basically rephrased the same paragraph 8 times. On the plus side, when you're not rambling, you had something worth saying in there.
Like:
Most of my friends never bothered to get the ex-pacs. We just didn't feel we needed them. One person eventually got SF and others followed suit....but we found BF2 eminently playable with just the base game.
It has aged especially badly in the last 3 years. The fact we're even talking about an almost 10 year old game though I think has a lot to say about it's actual popularity. I think it's innovations overrode the clunkiness, for the most part.
I think it was more their crude attempt at realism. They didn't realize that rounds coming out of the muzzle basically at random within the hitbox was bad. They didn't realize that the movement mechanics they introduced was perceived by players as unrealistic. (Because it feels like you weigh 1,000 pnds in BF2). There's a lot of stuff they missed along the way to trying to hit realism. But they still found "fun" in the end.
And while you may not think so, I see a lot of what BF2 did in almost every game now. I'm not saying it predates all FPS or is the grand-father of FPS....but from the squad-based layouts, the map previews, map interactivity, the upgrade schemes, the points tracking, all that ****....a good deal of that started with the BF franchise, while most FPS were still just arena and deathmatch kill fests. The reason I still like BF2 today is, in comparison to the games that came after, it feels hardcore. It's tougher, by a long shot, partly because the game makes it tougher. Compared to what CoD, the current Battlefield, and other realism shooters, BF2 is a totally different experience in good and bad ways. I appreciated it for being new when it came out, and I appreciate it for managing to still be different from the genre that's now exploded with titles.
Anyways, sarcasm aside, there's no real need to be this pissy about it. You've got your opinion I've got mine.
Like:
Most of my friends never bothered to get the ex-pacs. We just didn't feel we needed them. One person eventually got SF and others followed suit....but we found BF2 eminently playable with just the base game.
It has aged especially badly in the last 3 years. The fact we're even talking about an almost 10 year old game though I think has a lot to say about it's actual popularity. I think it's innovations overrode the clunkiness, for the most part.
I think it was more their crude attempt at realism. They didn't realize that rounds coming out of the muzzle basically at random within the hitbox was bad. They didn't realize that the movement mechanics they introduced was perceived by players as unrealistic. (Because it feels like you weigh 1,000 pnds in BF2). There's a lot of stuff they missed along the way to trying to hit realism. But they still found "fun" in the end.
And while you may not think so, I see a lot of what BF2 did in almost every game now. I'm not saying it predates all FPS or is the grand-father of FPS....but from the squad-based layouts, the map previews, map interactivity, the upgrade schemes, the points tracking, all that ****....a good deal of that started with the BF franchise, while most FPS were still just arena and deathmatch kill fests. The reason I still like BF2 today is, in comparison to the games that came after, it feels hardcore. It's tougher, by a long shot, partly because the game makes it tougher. Compared to what CoD, the current Battlefield, and other realism shooters, BF2 is a totally different experience in good and bad ways. I appreciated it for being new when it came out, and I appreciate it for managing to still be different from the genre that's now exploded with titles.
Anyways, sarcasm aside, there's no real need to be this pissy about it. You've got your opinion I've got mine.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
People actually played that game for the MP?
I have not even attempted to load it up.
If it wasn't for the dumb disc check, I would give it a try.
I liked the fire and atmosphere of the game. The animations inside of the vehicles were nice and fluid. There was a decent variety of weapons as well. The mortar was extremely fun to use.
The worst part of the game was the respawning enemies and that the overall story was a bit weak.
Change those, make other small improvements, realistic weapons and more unique side missions and I would be very interested.
I will also have to mention Sniper Elite. I paid $2 for it, and wish I didn't. I can not get into it.
I like the overall premises though. The game done with RO style weapons on a more modern engine can be interesting.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Frontlines had planes too if I remember correctly, but BF2 definitely has the best non-simulation jets imo.And ArmA2:OA
Upvote
0
i liked the jets in BFV, but then it's a period i like for equipment in general.
I thought BFV was a good game in the series but it isn't particularly popular.
I liked BF2 transfering to the use of ironsights, but i think removing a lot of the recoil made it feel a lot more of an arcade game than the previous 2, which seemed to force you into playing more deliberately.
I thought BFV was a good game in the series but it isn't particularly popular.
I liked BF2 transfering to the use of ironsights, but i think removing a lot of the recoil made it feel a lot more of an arcade game than the previous 2, which seemed to force you into playing more deliberately.
Upvote
0
I think BF2 is hugely overrated and put on too much of a pedestal. It's not a bad game by any stretch of the imagination but it does not deserve all of the praise it gets.
People tend to forget the long list of bugs, glitches and exploits it suffered from on release. Yes these were patched out, but exceedingly slowly over a long period of time.
Even when extremely game breaking **** was happening they still took an eternity to fix it. A good example is the blackhawks with guys constantly repairing them so fast they were almost indestructable flying around capping at will and making the US side own every map. How long did it take them to fix that chronic imbalance, months? Nearly a year if I remember correctly.
The gameplay wasn't great either, the movement was really clunky, the guns all felt like they were manufactured by Nerf Industries, levelling and gaining new weapons took an eternity of play and the ratio of infantry to vehicles was crap.
Despite all of this it did do things right though, like 64 player servers with good latency, good graphics and sound that performed well on a modest machine and it had a real strong balance on teamplay with a really well fleshed out squad system.
I rate it as a good game but not the genre defining piece of gold some people say it is.
People tend to forget the long list of bugs, glitches and exploits it suffered from on release. Yes these were patched out, but exceedingly slowly over a long period of time.
Even when extremely game breaking **** was happening they still took an eternity to fix it. A good example is the blackhawks with guys constantly repairing them so fast they were almost indestructable flying around capping at will and making the US side own every map. How long did it take them to fix that chronic imbalance, months? Nearly a year if I remember correctly.
The gameplay wasn't great either, the movement was really clunky, the guns all felt like they were manufactured by Nerf Industries, levelling and gaining new weapons took an eternity of play and the ratio of infantry to vehicles was crap.
Despite all of this it did do things right though, like 64 player servers with good latency, good graphics and sound that performed well on a modest machine and it had a real strong balance on teamplay with a really well fleshed out squad system.
I rate it as a good game but not the genre defining piece of gold some people say it is.
Upvote
0