Btw, another thing they forgot to add, an AUG thats actually worth using!! :evil:
mitu123
I don't have any problems with the AUG in BC2. Me neither. But Black Ops' AUG was slightly better. BC2's iron sights was kind of unwieldy to use though.
They should just keep everything from BF2, and add new stuff/improve stuff. Like add battalions (group of multiple squads), at least 128 players, bigger better maps with unique elements, greater set and variety of vehicles, awesome graphics, more customization options, etc. Don't go all out with CoD style classes and unlock/ranking system, it's not what Battlefield 3 needs.
I would like to see Jets with better audio feedback and visual. If I could break the sound barrier in-game flying above players then I will quite easily rate the game a 10.
I would agree with most everything on that list. What they need to do is take lessons learned from BF2 and apply them to the new engine. If this is a worthy sequel, that is...
Oh yeah, another thing which could be nice: Actual physicsbased real time destruction ala. Red Faction Guerilla. Seriously what they bragged about with BFBC2 was unimpressive, and it didn't help they tried to mask it with a dustcloud that would make iceland's volcanoes blush
I really, really, really want to see bots return to the series. People might say they are unnecessary now that nearly everyone has the ability to go online, but playing with bots is very different from playing with other people. It gives the gameplay a peculiar tactical edge that requires to distribute your efforts over the entire battlefield. I still find this extremely fun to do in the old Battlefields, yet I don't care for online multiplayer at all.
I really, really, really want to see bots return to the series. People might say they are unnecessary now that nearly everyone has the ability to go online, but playing with bots is very different from playing with other people. It gives the gameplay a peculiar tactical edge that requires to distribute your efforts over the entire battlefield. I still find this extremely fun to do in the old Battlefields, yet I don't care for online multiplayer at all.
DraugenCP
Agreed, glad to see more bot support getting love, personally I don't always want to play with people for many reasons, sometimes online is overrated, and besides, EA's servers suck.XD
How about different rank progression per faction ?:P
I was wondering a while back what it would be like if they brought a Battlefield game out where you could only buy one faction solder per retail disc ? say you just bought the game and you had to choose which faction you wanted to enlist as and that was it, if you choose MEC then you could only play as MEC and would have to buy the game again if you wanted to be USMC.
Or say you could choose one side of the the war and have a choice between the factions of that particular side.
I was just wondering if it would be more immersive or would it be drasticly one sided ?
To me, the list was basically saying "make BF2 but shinier :D". Which I can understand cos that game is awesome, but there are some things that I liked more in BC2 such as more rounded classes. I'm not saying BC2 did it right, but I always thought that some classes in BF2 filled too niche of a role, such as the engineer who wouldn't see use often (well, from what I played). Giving ammo to the assault class was also a nice touch in my opinion. I would like to see them change the weapon combinations around though. Medic with LMG was a bit over powered to me. But then I wouldn't know who to give the vital LMG to really :P. I have some ideas in my head but if I keep going on, most of you will pull a "TL:DR"
Log in to comment