richardhutnik said:
If there is no reason to own MW3, that still doesn't mean there is a reason to own BF3. For simple FPS action, with a group of people together, I have Black Ops (bots, Dead Ops arcade, Zombies) and also MW2 (for the Spec Ops mode). I see MW3 offers its own version of the hoard mode, and if it also supports 4 player split screen and hoard mode, then it is worth considering for me. So, I am not interested in a Call of Duty replacement, unless it does every single thing I have now (I doubt BF3 does), but provides a justifiable reason to get it. And that is the heart of the matter. What is BF3 bringing to the table, that justifies it being owned by me on its own merits? |
Buy Bad Company 2, or Bad Company 1 (will be hard to find full, quality games at this point though) to find out for yourself.
I think you're looking too broadly. When you say "FPS action, with a group of people together" you should not buy any other game than Modern Warfare.
The way you should be thinking though, is what TYPE of FPS action does Battlefield offer?
1) Destruction and open maps.
Oh how I fucking loathe Killzone 3 right now. If it's anything similar to Call of Duty, I hate the FPS mostly then. It's just a fucking mind numbing experience that you only have a few chokepoints in the map, with no way to flank the enemy. Games like Killzone 3 end up degenerating into an almost WWI like camping fest, that rewards defense and punishes offense. With high splash damage weapons too, this results in an absolutely infuriating experience.
Take Battlefield now. You have open maps, usually with a diversity of terrain. You can be running through a field with a few hay stacks and barns for cover first, then go up and down a hill, and enter into an urban area where every building can contain an enemy. Combined with lower damage/higher hitpoints (although Bad Company 2 took a wrong step with magnum ammo [sort of like a perk that raises bullet damage] and the general decerase in HP) this allows offensive people to quickly run to cover as soon as they're shot.
And here's the beauty. So, say you're a defender shooting down an attacker, and the attacker now takes cover behind a wall. Both the attacker and the defender now have the ability to shoot a grenade launcher or rocket, and to destroy each other's cover. If both players are experienced, then both begin to move from their cover in anticipation of it, and try to out maneuver each other. No stalemate.
One last example. There's a game mode that was introduced in Bad Company called Rush. It's essentially a destroy the objective mode. Now, in a game like Killzone (the first one. Second one prevents this a bit with the tactician spawn and removal of the spawn grenade), the defenders will just cover all the hallways, stay inside the room with the objective and defend. In Battlefield, instead of running through the alleyway towards the objective, you can literally enter into a building, pop open a grenade, and start making hole after hole, and make a path to the objective that way.
(Start at 1:15)
2) Vehicles
Again, this adds diversity to tactics. If Battlefield 3 gets it right, there will be a balance between vehicles and infantry, where both preform a support role for each other. Vehicles are supposed to aid attackers break through a line of defense (and defenders get some vehicles to counter this as well). You have heavy tanks that can act as a first line of offense. They can literally ram themselves through a wall, fire a smoke grenade, and provide cover as infantry runs behind them. They also are supposed to engage enemy heavy tanks, in conjunction with anti-tank infantry.
You have light tanks that are more maneuverable than heavy tanks. They can go around and flank heavy enemy tanks. Depending on the skill of each respective driver, a light tank can even take out a heavy tank with its higher rate of fire and speed. In short, I like to think of light tanks as calvary, engaging from the side. They're also a great support for infantry, since they can blow down a lot of cover with their faster cannon.
You have choppers as well, which (at least in Bad Company 1, they REALLY screwed up in Bad Company 2) which can be a powerful tool, if properly supported. They are a lot more delicate than tanks, and if they engage a group of enemies alone, they will get shot down (that is, when Bad Company 1 allowed small arms to damage choppers, and didn't allow the crazy maneuevering Bad Company 2 introduced). However, when a chopper attacks with tanks and infantry, the enemy can't afford turn their heads up, and the chopper can absolutely rein terror from above.
Jets, I can't commment on since I only played console Battlefields. KylieDog did say they were overpowered in BF2. Hopefully this won't be the case.
Yeah, this is ending up becoming a wall of text, so I'll stop XD
