[QUOTE="mitu123"]
[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]
BF3s is orders of magnitude better from a sheer technical standpoint. It is factually better. Though if you prefer the more hollywood boomy sound of BC2 that's pure personal taste. Though after studying sound engineering for 2 and a half years, BF3s sound is incredible to listen to and makes BC2s look like childsplay.
One thing I preferred in BC2 sound though was the exaggerated sniper rifle sounds. They're more realistic in BF3, but they had that sweet sound in BC2 with a huge deafening crack
seanmcloughlin
I really don't know what I was thinking when I made that comparison.:PPersonal taste maybe
Hmm, I distinctly remember being impressed by BC2's sound design. I loved that when you went into a building there was that really nice sounding echo. I also stuck a sub woofer at my feet so that standing near a tank would shake my feet and rock the table when it fired. I'd hear APCs dishing it out on the other side of the map. The crack of bullets passing over my head.I honestly don't remember BF3 having nearly as enjoyable sound effects (even though they may be more releastic, as you said). Although, it may just be that BF2142->BC2 was a huge step up in sound design that BC2->BF3 wasn't even noticeable for me.
On the overall scale, I prefer BC2 for the competitive gunplay and class/balance that promotes teamwork/skill over luck. BF3's weapon mechanics were too random and lowered the skill ceiling drastically. For a majority of engagements, you were just better off holding down the trigger instead of using single fire or burst fire. Combined with suppression, most fights became absurdly frustrating with both parties unloading entire clips and neither of them landing hits. BF3 would have been miles better without the suppression system or at least limited it to bipod or heavy weapons (tank HMG, etc). Imagine the secondary gunner position on a tank being used to suppress RPG teams, instead of boiling down gun fights to just dumb luck. The damage scheme felt punishing to players who played the objective and exaggerated the downfalls of client side hit detection. I also really, really hate the vehicle unlocks in BF3. Default vehicles might as well be made of paper and shoot giant fluff balls at enemies. And, my god, the number of lock on weapons in this game.... Seriously, in BC2 you could have strong vehicles because good players would be able to counter them with skill based weapons. In BF2142, you could steal/hold enemy vehicles and it would almost guarantee you the win because they were power weapons. Capturing key points would also remove these vehicles (STRATEGY!). As much as they try, DICE will never be able to find a good balance between lock on weapons and vehicles. The destruction was also toned down for BF3, which some people like, but I despise. I want to ram my tank through a ****ing house, dammit DICE, that's battlefield.
It's tough for me to recommend either because almost every iteration of battlefield I play, I prefer the previous iteration.The theme song for BF1942 still gets my blood pumping. I will say that BF3 was the first BF game that I actually got too bored and too frustrated with to keep playing and it caused me to lose interest in the entire series; I doubt I will be picking up BF4 unless DICE really steps it up for their next game with much better map design (more strategy), more powerful vehicles, better gunplay, better class system that promotes teamwork, and server side hit detection or automatic kicks for high pings.
Log in to comment