battlefield:bad company , as good as COD4 ?

Bad Company is...well, bad.

It's nothing like the PC versions. Gold rush is a horrible game mode imo.

Destructable enviorments are pretty fun though.

As an FPS, Call of Duty 4 has set the bar incredibly high and I don't believe another game will overtake it for quite some time. Every new FPS that comes out, we can't help but to compare it to CoD 4.

Anyways, Battlefield: Bad Company is a different type of game, but it's not too bad. It's not the same Battlefield you'd play on the computer, but you still get the chaotic battles, good vehicle combat, and different classes to play.

Eh, I'm just waiting for UT3 to hit the 360. Then goodbye COD4. :)

Battlefield Bad Company is great. i dont know what all of you are talking about when you say it's bad. It's not like the previous battlefield games i'll agree, but sometimes change is good.

The weapon's classes aren't extremely balanced too well- the support and assault classes can heal themselves pretty much whenever they feel like it. The beta version has an extremely high fall damage (fall 1 story and say goodbye to a good 20 health, fall 2 stories and say goodbye to 60 health) which is insanely stupid IMO. But the bad parts aside, its a great game with great combat, tight controls, really cool weapons, awesome graphics, and is extremely innovative with it's frostbite game engine.

The Gold Rush game mode isn't bad at all, it's basicly team deathmatch with some bonus objectives. The gold crates attract a huge amount of combat around them, which i think is just what battlefield always suffered from the most (combat spread out too much over a huge map).

On the whole i think BF:BC looks very promising, and I will definitely be buying it.

Like most battlefield games, the fate of Bad Company (at last in multiplayer) largely hinges on the community's ability to embrace the teamplay concepts DICE is attempting to force-feed us...and I feel their intent is noble. What I've played of the beta doesn't look promising, and I blame this mostly on the smacktards I've encountered. As another poster mentioned, Gold Rush plays a bit like team deathmatch...but without much teamwork. Of course, expect the usual vehicle camping too. I'm hoping it gets better over time as more players get the hang of it..and the smacktards get bored and go back to CoD4 or Halo 3. I'm expecting the full-game will include conquest mode. I feel that is a far deeper game mode. Gold Rush's head-on frontline-orieinted combat offers little room for maneuvering and deep team strategy. It's simply attack & defend. But then again, I'm not sure if console gamer's can handle anything much deeper.

As good as CoD4? Too early to tell. But I can say that is totally different. The vehicles and large maps give it a totally different flavor than CoD4. Blasting through a building with a tank's canon to kill an enemy on the other side is something CoD4 can't come close to emulating. As a result, you really have to think differently when playing Bad Company. Some will like it...others who refuse to adapt will hate it. I don't expect it to garner the same following as CoD4, but those who like will play it for a very long time.

Like most battlefield games, the fate of Bad Company (at last in multiplayer) largely hinges on the community's ability to embrace the teamplay concepts DICE is attempting to force-feed us...and I feel their intent is noble. What I've played of the beta doesn't look promising, and I blame this mostly on the smacktards I've encountered. As another poster mentioned, Gold Rush plays a bit like team deathmatch...but without much teamwork. Of course, expect the usual vehicle camping too. I'm hoping it gets better over time as more players get the hang of it..and the smacktards get bored and go back to CoD4 or Halo 3. I'm expecting the full-game will include conquest mode. I feel that is a far deeper game mode. Gold Rush's head-on frontline-orieinted combat offers little room for maneuvering and deep team strategy. It's simply attack & defend. But then again, I'm not sure if console gamer's can handle anything much deeper.

As good as CoD4? Too early to tell. But I can say that is totally different. The vehicles and large maps give it a totally different flavor than CoD4. Blasting through a building with a tank's canon to kill an enemy on the other side is something CoD4 can't come close to emulating. As a result, you really have to think differently when playing Bad Company. Some will like it...others who refuse to adapt will hate it. I don't expect it to garner the same following as CoD4, but those who like will play it for a very long time.

Mabooza

I think it's been confirmed that there will be no Conquest mode.

Like most battlefield games, the fate of Bad Company (at last in multiplayer) largely hinges on the community's ability to embrace the teamplay concepts DICE is attempting to force-feed us...and I feel their intent is noble. What I've played of the beta doesn't look promising, and I blame this mostly on the smacktards I've encountered. As another poster mentioned, Gold Rush plays a bit like team deathmatch...but without much teamwork. Of course, expect the usual vehicle camping too. I'm hoping it gets better over time as more players get the hang of it..and the smacktards get bored and go back to CoD4 or Halo 3. I'm expecting the full-game will include conquest mode. I feel that is a far deeper game mode. Gold Rush's head-on frontline-orieinted combat offers little room for maneuvering and deep team strategy. It's simply attack & defend. But then again, I'm not sure if console gamer's can handle anything much deeper.

As good as CoD4? Too early to tell. But I can say that is totally different. The vehicles and large maps give it a totally different flavor than CoD4. Blasting through a building with a tank's canon to kill an enemy on the other side is something CoD4 can't come close to emulating. As a result, you really have to think differently when playing Bad Company. Some will like it...others who refuse to adapt will hate it. I don't expect it to garner the same following as CoD4, but those who like will play it for a very long time.

Mabooza

wow....thats like, exactly what i have thought about all battlefield games! very nice post, very fair.

About not being able to work as a team very well, that's true about any battlefield game. The thing i like about BC is that all of my friends have xbox's and will probably get this game, meaning that working as a team (or putting together a clan) will be so much simpler than on the PC versions of battlefield (especially with the almighty xbox friends list).

I am definitely hoping to see bigger, more tactics-oriented maps (and some infantry-only maps FFS, i have never been really all that crazy about vehicles in FPS's) They need to balance classes and weapons better IMO, just look at the M16 vs. XM8. XM8 is more accurate and fires faster while the only advantage the M16 has over the XM8 is the *slightest* bit more damage (so little that you wouldn't be able to notice it).

I have the beta and its a very mediocre shooter. The only good thing is the Destructible environment. Hit detection is very suspect especially with the assault rifles. I understand this is only Beta but I can't see it coming close to COD4 or Halo3 Polish, which is too bad since it looks beautiful.killzones

the hit detection just takes some getting used to, you actually have to lead your target (like in real life, not to the same degree i'll admit).

BF2 is such a great game, why did they change it so much? I think it would translate well enough to consoles. Maybe another developer handles the console versions?callen3

And I think this is still made by DICE.