Eilia567's forum posts

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#1 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

I have just gotten through playing 5 hours of BFBC2 as all classes. Although I know there may be more game types for online multiplayer, here is what I have seen in the hours that I've played the demo.

The game really gives you the feel that you're trying to 'rush'. It's fast-paced, much like MW2, and it keeps you engaged and alert at all times. There are many things that I loved about the demo so far, that other FPS's don't touch on too much. For instance, the series is known for it's snipers having excellent camouflage. Yet, I can't help but get the feeling that I'm trapped at certain points when I get to a good sniping spot. These spots are few and far between, and anyone who has played the game for more than 2 matches knows where all the sniping spots are. This is a bad sign, as snipers should be able to use their camouflage to hide themselves whenever neccessary, and after a kill, they shouldn't be rushed 10 seconds later by another squad member, simply because they know where you are.

The assualt rifle that you first receive as an attacker is awful. It has more recoil than the medic's LMG!!! Not to mention it has a low magazine capacity and the iron sights are simply useless. The only thing that I enjoyed about the assault rifle was the noob tube, which at long ranges, cannot be aimed for beans. Another useless attachment. Also, you spawn with 1 grenade... man, do those things go fast, or what? Sure you can resupply, but if you're already in the midst of a confrontation between buildings, you're trapped with no way to clear a room, especially as a sniper.

Now tanks and vehicles are an awesome touch to any FPS. It's comforting to know you're going in to a town square knowing that you have the fire support and cover of a tank..... until it gets destroyed within 10 seconds, and you're going along with it. The vehicles in the game are too underpowered for what they're truly capable of. I mean, there are rocket outposts in every town square, their object being to desroy tanks. Come on, that's not fair at all. Maybe mines would be a more practical way of destoying a tank, but a couple of rockets to the side of a tank shouldn't be able to do so much.

There is much, much more that I want to discuss, but I wanted to post this thread so I can hear feedback from others. The game has me excited in many ways, but as a more 'realistic' FPS, it has much to work on. LMG's should not be so powerful in CQB, they are support weapons made for using covering fire while in the prone. AR's are most deadly when used at medium and close ranges, which they've done a 'pretty good' job on. A bullet from a sniper rifle, no matter where you hit, should down an enemy instantly, as that's what they're made for.

commandercrap

\

1: The tank needs 4 rocket hits to be destroyed, and two missile camera thing lol :)

2: Save your grenade. This isnt MW2 the maps are big and you never know when you might need a grenade, so dont whip it away, save it. and the resupply helps alot. There is a spec that allows u to have more than 1 grenade btw.

3: I agree with you on the 1st assault rifle, it is garbage.

4: The job of a sniper is to take out leaders and potential leaders. For example our (clan) squad leader is always killed with a sniper bullet to the head. Also the job of a sniper is to change positions after shooting.

The game is good where it is.

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#2 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

bump

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#3 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

bump

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#4 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

/\ /\ Topic

PSN ID: Paintedelta

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

which one

SimplyFatal

Hey no shogun total war?

- well i guess only true epic total war fans, would know that their is a shogun one. lol.

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#6 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

[QUOTE="Doolz2024"]

I thought both were awful. I wouldn't recommend either. Forza 3 ftw.

razgriz_101

how can you assume he has a 360?

Both are decent games and are a good play if you can get them cheaper tbh.

I have both consoles. And its $69.99 for shift.

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#7 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

Which one should i get?

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#8 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

nice, If we were in the closed beta, do we get to keep our rank and weps?

Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts
bump.
Avatar image for Eilia567
Eilia567

408

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

4

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10 Eilia567
Member since 2007 • 408 Posts

[QUOTE="Sokittoya"]

[QUOTE="kingsfan_0333"]

Why do people assume that Natal will be the central control scheme in these FPS games? Personally, when I think of natal in an fps, I think of leaning around corners, ducking/crouching etc. There is no reason why I can't have a controller in my hands and use natal in a subtle way at the same time.

In addition, sometimes there just aren't enough buttons to maximize actions. Natal could help with that.

kingsfan_0333

probably because Microsoft is advertising it as the controller. Or should i say as a controllerless experience. You know since having no controller would bring you further into the experience, and make it so much easier to play... :roll: So taking that into account, its understandable why people are assuming that.

Why does everybody take everything so literally? It's like I have to spoon feed little children around here who can't think for themselves. There are going to be LOTS of controllerless games. That doesn't mean that every game that uses natal can't use a controller. In addition, Microsoft doesn't make every game - not even close. So what they intended Natal to be used for doesn't necessarily mean that other devs need to do the same. Not too long ago there were rumors that Bungie was going to use Natal for Reach. Do you really think they were going to completly ignore the controller? No. They were going to use it to supplement and add to the experience.

I think Natal is only going to be used for arcade games, designed by Microsoft, purposely for Natal.