By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Slimebeast on 14 February 2010
Edit Thread
Akvod said:
Slimebeast said:

Oh I see. That brings us to the topic of objective based gameplay. Thankfully BC2 is an objective based game rather than a frigging DM, but now that you mention winning, I actually don't care if my team wins in BC2. This must be a big flaw in the game design with Battlefield games, because I couldn't care less about winning. The only thing I watch is my own stats. For me it feels, and it is sad, that it's just two groups of soldiers killing each other and activating/deactivating these explosives at some random objectives - which feels very artificial. And after each round it switches, so all of a sudden I'm American defender again after being Russian attacker.

I come from Enemy Territory (the original and Quake Wars), the master of objective based gameplay, and there it actually feels meaningful to try to make your team win.

So at this point I'm hoping for clans to give the motivation to really play for the team.

And this comes from a huge team-player. It's really a pity, because I totally love the feeling when you are in your little squad of 3-4 guys doing things together.

Thoughts?

My thoughts? I mean... Jesus, what can DICE possibly do if you're not motivated to complete the objectives. I think your problem is simply that you don't have any buddies to play this game with and coordinate. Although I though you 360 people will be alright with the ammount of mic owners you guys have, if you communicate and strategize with people, the objectives don't feel random. When you spam C4s to a Quad with a buddy and take out nearly 3/4s of crate B's HP, that's fun. When you're shouting to simply demolish the walls of the house so you can bring it down, that's fun. When you get a charge on the objective and you tell your buddy to run up the ladder with you and kill all the fools who just go up the stairs, that's fun. When you steal an enemy's tank and wreck havock on them, that's fun. When you tell your squad to raid the indoors objective first, and you're wielding our shotty at close range, that's fun.

 

I mean, but still, you don't have any motivation to run back and defuse a crate? You don't feel the pinch when you're defending crates that are in collapsable buildings and a enemy tank pierces through your defenses? When you see a swarm of enemies break through your front lines and you're on a Heavy MG?

I don't see the problems with switching sides after every round... SOCOM did it, don't know about the old skool games yo, but I like to have some variation in my gameplay.

Green: you're describing lots of game moments that I agree are extremely fun, and they often come naturally, but they don't necessarily connect with the feeling that winning is important. And sitting with your buddy on a hilltop sniping people is just as fun, but it doesn't help the team much.

Red: what's that? C4s? Quad? crate's HP?

Don't get me wrong, switching sides ain't bad and most games do it, but in combination with the artificial team objectives a constant switching of sides doesn't help mutch. I mean in ET QW you can play on the Strogg side the whole night if you want, so it's unfortunate that BC2 didn't use any trick to make the team play more important. Like in MAG you even have to choose one faction and stick with it.