Good news about Battlefield 3…

… for PC users, that is.

“Battlefield 3 is the true successor to Battlefield 2. Beyond our signature multiplayer, we have also included a full single-player campaign and a co-op campaign – all straight out of the box. As for fan favorite features, how does the return of jets, prone, and 64-player multiplayer (on PC) sound?” – Battlefield Blog

Sounds like but a small portion of many features lost since BF2’s release in 2005.  I would ask what took so long, but I already know: consoles.  As soon as consoles became apart of the Battlefield scene it dumbed down the features, simplified the gameplay, and had an overall watering down effect.  Maybe it’s going to far to say that all games are better on PC, but it’s a fact that Battlefield games were originally better when they were PC exclusives.   To all the console owners upset about the (on PC) part, just imagine how you’d feel having those things for years then losing them. Yeah, it sucks.

They need to deliver on the maps though.  I want some BF2 map sizes with plenty of room for jets to dogfight, helicopters to actually sneaks units in behind, and for skirmishes to take place in remote places on the battlefield.  Maps are too small now in BF and CoD.  It’s like throwing people in a box with machine guns and then wondering why everyone died at once.  It also needs mod support, complete server control from multiple server hosts, commanders (maybe with some tweaks), customizable squads,  and just about everything else Battlefield 2 in order to be the true successor.

We’re finally catching up with 2005.

  • Imo the BC2 maps are (bar a few) the perfect size, the few that are not are dominated by helis completely. But that said I do prefer playing as a soldier over a pilot, less vehicles please! 😛

  • BC2 are a bit small for the vehicles (that’s why vehicles dominate in BFBC2), and definitely too small for jets. The bigger they are the less of a role helicopters play in killing people and more role they play in transportation. This allows some players to act is shuttlers — they make trips back and forth to the base and the front lines. It’s actually quite fun.

  • BF2 pretty much felt like this to me:
    Run around looking for someone to shoot at
    Run around looking for someone to shoot at
    Run around looking for someone to shoot at
    Run around looking for someone to shoot at
    Run around looking for someone to shoot at
    Run around looking for someone to shoot at
    Get blasted by a tank, heli or jet
    Rinse and repeat

    I know it’s not like that all the time, but since I don’t find any fun in flying the jets or driving the tanks it became quite boring to me. The only problem with BC2 for me is some maps where vehicles dominate too much, but the solution to me is NOT bigger maps, it’s less vehicles. 🙂

  • Ohh and btw, BC2 Vietnam has been flat out AWESOME so far. It feels like they’ve tuned down tanks and helis somewhat, easier to kill for non engis and less deadly. Might just be me though.

  • I’m with you on this, Keen. As much as I like Bad Company 2, it’s really just the Frostbite Engine that grabs me. BF 2142 was my most played game ever, and if BF 3 delivers the classic gameplay on the Frostbite 2 engine, and does what you mention above, I’m set.

    I want to go back to the good old days when you could actually get behind the seat of an aircraft carrier and ram it into an enemy destroyer.

  • Apart from the comical Battlefield Heroes I’ve not actually played the BF games as much as I’d like. It’s always seemed to me that the main “schtick” of these game series was the ready availability of the vehicles and how much fun those vehicles were with their simplified controls (I’ve never been able to effectively fly the damn planes though!)
    So yeah big maps would seem to make sense when those planes are jet-powered.
    With a new one on it’s way I will get a chance to take part from the start this time… on the PC of course.

  • I enjoyed BC2 quite a lot. Recently, I wanted something with a very different feel so I’ve been playing Arma 2 Combined Ops. It’s a very different kind of game compared to the BF series and harder, but I find success much more rewarding.

  • Got to agree with Proximo about vehicles, I bet if you asked 100 BC2 players about fav maps 90% would say the city levels which were much more infantry based. A good pilot was just too OP and very frustrating for those who on the receiving end.

  • @Proximo

    I know the feeling. One thing I hated about BF2 was that whenever you joined a good server, it seemed like they pulled a switcharoo on you.

    if you were in the mood for vehicle combat, they would be slogging through the close combat maps like Karkand or sharqi. If you were in the mood for close combat the server would start running maps like daqing, or god forbid fushe pass.

    great game though. looking forward to bf3

  • Squads in BF2 were much larger than this 4 or 5 limit they have in BC2. I’m anxious for the larger squads again.

  • BF2 was, without a doubt, the most fun I have ever had playing an online shooter. I remember my first map like the birth of my children lol. I spawned into Strike at Karkand to see smoke, fire, humvees and tanks rolling by, etc. I have never been to war, and I have mad respect for those that have fought and died, but I have to think that that is the closest I have ever come to feeling of being in combat – heart thumping action and total chaos.