• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

RO2 and why I will play BF3 more

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#341
Meh, having played the BF3 beta I'm not impressed. It is a good game, and it is fun, but nothing about it has blown me away. I will not be spending money on BF3, but if someone handed me a copy I wouldn't complain. Everything from the lack of non-Origin support, the lack of an in-game server browser, and launching the game through Internet Explorer don't help the game's case either. As a longtime BF player I also am not crazy about the scale of the game so far. While I've only played Metro, the game feels more like MoH than BC2 or any other BF game for that matter.

I'm glad that I'll be sticking with RO2, it isn't that BF3 is bad, but there is definatly more in the future for RO2 in the way of free content, mods, and new maps.

If I were to make a, "OMG BF3 sucks!1!" comment it would be that having to purchase the Special Edition simply to have Karkand would be like RO2 charging extra for Apartments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dr.Phibes
Upvote 0
#342
I'll be playing both but wont buy BF3 till I see more.

My style of play roots back to RTCW, a mix of crazy FPS non-realistic stuff to amazing dyno plants that set level of happiness when I play.

I have yet to ever have the same feeling in a game since RTCW; RIP Wolf, you were part of my youth and I will always miss you. :eek:

But moving onto RO2, if RO2 could implement planting dynamite and both sides needing to plant on an OBJ, it would be the ultimate game for me. But so far it's territory and I am not a fan.
 
Upvote 0
#343
FBOTheLiuetenant said:
Meh, having played the BF3 beta I'm not impressed. It is a good game, and it is fun, but nothing about it has blown me away. I will not be spending money on BF3, but if someone handed me a copy I wouldn't complain. Everything from the lack of non-Origin support, the lack of an in-game server browser, and launching the game through Internet Explorer don't help the game's case either. As a longtime BF player I also am not crazy about the scale of the game so far. While I've only played Metro, the game feels more like MoH than BC2 or any other BF game for that matter.

I'm glad that I'll be sticking with RO2, it isn't that BF3 is bad, but there is definatly more in the future for RO2 in the way of free content, mods, and new maps.

If I were to make a, "OMG BF3 sucks!1!" comment it would be that having to purchase the Special Edition simply to have Karkand would be like RO2 charging extra for Apartments.
Click to expand...

-Why is the lack of non-origin support matter. What is so bad about origin, sure seams like a lot of other digital distribution services. I love steam, but it is not a deal breaker if I have to buy a game from someone else.

-No need for an in-game server browser, there is battlelog

-You can launch it in any browser, and it is so much faster than an in-game browser, I love it.

-You say yourself you have only played metro, you cant judge scale off of one of the smallest maps in the game on Rush game mode none-the-less

-The "Special Edition" is the same price as the regular addition, and it gives you 4 extra maps. To people who don't buy this as a preorder they will get the pack for free later down the road.


Gut_You_Up said:
But moving onto RO2, if RO2 could implement planting dynamite and both sides needing to plant on an OBJ, it would be the ultimate game for me. But so far it's territory and I am not a fan.
Click to expand...

The ONLY way this would ever be a good idea is if we were fighting over a bridge or something and the Russians needed to plant some dynamite and the Germans had to defend. Other than that scenario, I cant think of any reason why two sides would be fighting over placing dynamite.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Heilkraut and Oo.k.
Upvote 0
#344
ChaoticRambo said:
-Why is the lack of non-origin support matter. What is so bad about origin, sure seams like a lot of other digital distribution services. I love steam, but it is not a deal breaker if I have to buy a game from someone else.

-No need for an in-game server browser, there is battlelog

-You can launch it in any browser, and it is so much faster than an in-game browser, I love it.

-You say yourself you have only played metro, you cant judge scale of of one of the smallest maps in the game on Rush game mode none-the-less

-The "Special Edition" is the same price as the regular addition, and it gives you 4 extra maps. To people who don't buy this as a preorder they will get the pack for free later down the road.
Click to expand...

- I have my self played tons of rounds of Capsian Border 64 players and it feels no where epic as the past BF games, it didn't feel like to me I was part of a massive battle at all, Metro feels more like a huge battle then Capsian Border.

-That's false, seriously, would it make sense to pre order and get the pack, then later when it releases everyone else gets it for free? that's not how pre order incentives work. Also because DICE has said that Back To Karkand, when it releases will be $14.99 to people who didn't pre order. It doesn't come out day 1 but months after, and thats for people who pre ordered or not. Just that people who pre ordered get them for free while if you don't you have to pay $14.99. (wow the same price as the CoD Map packs, and these aren't even new or original, just remakes and trying to cash in on peoples nostalgia and people to play on more servers)

I remember when DICE said they would never do something like that because they wouldn't want to split the community, funny how things change like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oo.k. and Echo Black
Upvote 0
#346
Krobar said:
Origin gets to remove, from your hard drive, whatever they decide is "illegal software". As I've been told.
Click to expand...

You shouldn't base your opinion or wrong information, check your sources next time.

You also might keep in mind the in steam's disclosure clause they take no responsibility for viruses, losses of games due to closed or locked accounts, and they don't guarantee you will always have access to your account.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heilkraut and Oo.k.
Upvote 0
#350
ChaoticRambo said:
-Why is the lack of non-origin support matter. What is so bad about origin, sure seams like a lot of other digital distribution services. I love steam, but it is not a deal breaker if I have to buy a game from someone else.

-No need for an in-game server browser, there is battlelog

-You can launch it in any browser, and it is so much faster than an in-game browser, I love it.

-You say yourself you have only played metro, you cant judge scale off of one of the smallest maps in the game on Rush game mode none-the-less

-The "Special Edition" is the same price as the regular addition, and it gives you 4 extra maps. To people who don't buy this as a preorder they will get the pack for free later down the road.
Click to expand...

1. Origin will never do for gaming what Steam does. Origin is just as annoying as Steam was when it first came out, but I never believe EA will use it for anything more than DRM.

2. There is always a need for an in-game server browser, having to alt-tab just to change servers is stupid. Just because something "works" doesn't mean it isn't stupid.

3. I haven't found it to be any faster than an in-game browser. Tons of games have a Play Now auto-join feature. Having to mess with joining through a browser is needlessly complex compared to just having everything right there in-game. Not only that, but launching a game through IE just feels cheap, like it is a silly Korean F2P MMO.

4. As far as level design, Metro and I assume the other maps are very linear. The layout is boring and very straightforward. Compared to even the smallest Rush maps in BC2 Metro is small. And Rush typically is the LARGEST map size in BF, as per the last 2 games that had Rush.

I'm not buying BF3 because I think it is terrible, because I dont think it is terrible. I'm not buying it because it is too much of the same. And because I'd rather not give EA/DICE any more money. Until they actually innovate something I'll give my money to other developers.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Goten
Upvote 0
#353
I guess you missed the part where we can't bind mouse and you have to join a game and spawn to access the settings and it will reset if you get killed, while trying to figure out why those tards won't let us bind our mouses, like every decent FPS out there in the past. BF3 is nothing but a tool for EA to force Origin down your throat, steal your money and laugh at you... And you're still a fanboy after all that, pitiful.
 
Upvote 0
#354
FBOTheLiuetenant said:
1. Origin will never do for gaming what Steam does. Origin is just as annoying as Steam was when it first came out, but I never believe EA will use it for anything more than DRM.

2. There is always a need for an in-game server browser, having to alt-tab just to change servers is stupid. Just because something "works" doesn't mean it isn't stupid.

3. I haven't found it to be any faster than an in-game browser. Tons of games have a Play Now auto-join feature. Having to mess with joining through a browser is needlessly complex compared to just having everything right there in-game. Not only that, but launching a game through IE just feels cheap, like it is a silly Korean F2P MMO.

4. As far as level design, Metro and I assume the other maps are very linear. The layout is boring and very straightforward. Compared to even the smallest Rush maps in BC2 Metro is small. And Rush typically is the LARGEST map size in BF, as per the last 2 games that had Rush.

I'm not buying BF3 because I think it is terrible, because I dont think it is terrible. I'm not buying it because it is too much of the same. And because I'd rather not give EA/DICE any more money. Until they actually innovate something I'll give my money to other developers.
Click to expand...


1. Who cares, if there were not other services, steam would get broken up for having a monopoly - be happy there are other options. And other that having good sales, I don't see what steam has done so great for the community. Its a nice service, but only because I don't have to go to gamestop anymore.

2. Or you can leave the game your in, something you have to do for a game with in-game browser. You have more options for things to do, it is all wrapped into a nice small smooth package. Try setting new filters and refreshing a previous BF game and do the same in battlelog - much faster.

3. See above.

4. You judge map size by how much of the map is playable at any given time, Rush is very small compared to a conquest map that lets you go wherever you want. And BFBC2 is the first game to offer Rush game mode on the PC.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Heilkraut and Moyako
Upvote 0
#355
Oo.k. said:
I guess you missed the part where we can't bind mouse and you have to join a game and spawn to access the settings and it will reset if you get killed, while trying to figure out why those tards won't let us bind our mouses, like every decent FPS out there in the past. BF3 is nothing but a tool for EA to force Origin down your throat, steal your money and laugh at you... And you're still a fanboy after all that, pitiful.
Click to expand...

People really misuse the term "fanboy". How are they forcing Origin on you? Sure you need it for the game, but if you want that is all you need it for. Why do people complain about it? Does it take up to much space? It is just so EA can direct their products much better, meaning they do make more money but who cares, your not spending any more for it.
 
Upvote 0
#356
It didn't really take me long playing the BF3 beta to realize that RO2 really does have the best avatar movement in any FPS I've played in both function and feeling. For example, I'm constantly annoyed that pressing sprint while being crouched makes you stand up.

The game is also very frustrating, although that often may partially be the bad hit detection. In RO, the reason you die sticks out like a sore thumb, with BF3, not so much.
 
Upvote 0
#357
ChaoticRambo said:
1. Who cares, if there were not other services, steam would get broken up for having a monopoly - be happy there are other options. And other that having good sales, I don't see what steam has done so great for the community. Its a nice service, but only because I don't have to go to gamestop anymore.

2. Or you can leave the game your in, something you have to do for a game with in-game browser. You have more options for things to do, it is all wrapped into a nice small smooth package. Try setting new filters and refreshing a previous BF game and do the same in battlelog - much faster.

3. See above.

4. You judge map size by how much of the map is playable at any given time, Rush is very small compared to a conquest map that lets you go wherever you want. And BFBC2 is the first game to offer Rush game mode on the PC.
Click to expand...

1. What is your point? Steam has done quite a bit for PC gaming, all sorts of indie developers owe their companies to the fact that Steam helped distribute their games to a wider audience. We are here on the RO2 FORUMS in large part to Steam's involvement in Ostfront being distributed on Steam.

2. Many games now have an in-game browser you can access without leaving the game first. And so far it has not proven to be any better than an in-game alternative.

3 See above

4. No, I'm judging based on the entirety of the map, including every control point. Fact is these new maps, and the ones in BC2 are nothing compared to the old BF games. Even the CQ maps are linear, three control points in a line. Sure you can go anywhere but whats the point?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#358
It made RTCW epic in style of play, one of the best MAPS. PLant Dyno on an Anti AA and plant Dyno on a radio operations.

Doesn't have to be a bridge lol...think a little, it's a game, make me get nervous planting and possibly getting shot. Thats what gaming was about for me 10 year ago :( Oh god :rolleyes:


ChaoticRambo said:
The ONLY way this would ever be a good idea is if we were fighting over a bridge or something and the Russians needed to plant some dynamite and the Germans had to defend. Other than that scenario, I cant think of any reason why two sides would be fighting over placing dynamite.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
#359
I know CoD is not BF3, but they are both the "same bed fellows" and both are shoot-em up arcade type FPS.....and boring. Killing 20 -30 enemies without a scratch is fun, no doubt, but that is not where RO2 shines. Maybe it's just me, but it took me a week of constant play to score over 5 kills as I kept getting waxed. Frustrating, but oh so challenging. It just depends on the type of shooter you enjoy and obviously the difficulties and challenges of RO2 are not for you. So, see ya.
Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 3 Official Gameplay - YouTube
`swamp
 
  • Like
Reactions: MissionMaximus
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu