Battlefield has ruined all other shooters for me

Digital Joker

Digital Joker

Do I look like I'm joking?
Sep 22, 2013
1,860
733
1,580
Edmonton Alberta
I've noticed since I started playing Battlefield 3 a coup!e years ago I just can't enjoy any other FPS. I used to love Halo but found the last one to just be OK, used to love COD but hate it now and from the limited time I've spent with Killzone SF I don't like it one bit.
I've always preferred realism and couple that with the great gunplay of Battlefield and I just can't bring myself to play anything else.
 
I'm not a huge shooter fan, but I do agree that BF is in a different league than most of the others. I like Halo too but they are just so different that I don't compare the two.
 
Realism, battlefield and COD should not all be in the same sentence. I guess their on the realistic side compared to games like Halo or Team Fortress 2.
 
I played Battlefield 1942 on the PC years ago but didn't play for a while and it fell off my radar. But I decided with X1 to pick BF4 up instead of COD and all I can say is this game is soo much more rewarding than COD. I am not very good at it but am getting better. Loads of fun.
 
I just want Halo & CoD to "grow the f*ck up." I feel like I've sat through five years of titles marketed directly to that 10-18 year old age range. I'd love for a CoD or Halo to be marketed to a 18-25 year old age range instead. Just a real adult story line along with graphics/gameplay that weren't cheesy, more skill again. More grit, darkness...a real war in Halo with big vehicle battles where everything wasn't so glossy or candy-coated. Some realistic paint on the vehicles that would scratch off, realistic look is what I'm trying to get at instead of comic book/action figure look.

This will all never happen though as both series have sold out so far that all they care about is a wider, younger audience in general with just barely enough to keep the more hardcore playing it.
 
I have discovered that after nearly a decade of being too much of a snob to play competitive FPS I am really bad at it. Every match is a brutal grind to keep my ratio above one...

Woo hoo, 4 kills, 3 deaths, a score of 1650. Right down at the bottom of the leader board. At least Im not like those noobs who's ratio is a fraction.

Ok, about playing the objective... Not all objectives are created equal. You have to control the objective next to your base or your team loses. It is really that simple.

Second... Everyone who rushes the line of scrimmage dies. Period. You can get good kills just by sitting back and shooting the fools who rush the line...

Third, if you want to fly planes or helicopters, please go to a deserted server and learn there.

With healthy doses of....

th


Relax, it is just a game, or so I keep telling myself.
 
devilsgrin_6 said:
I just want Halo & CoD to "grow the f*ck up." I feel like I've sat through five years of titles marketed directly to that 10-18 year old age range. I'd love for a CoD or Halo to be marketed to a 18-25 year old age range instead. Just a real adult story line along with graphics/gameplay that weren't cheesy, more skill again. More grit, darkness...a real war in Halo with big vehicle battles where everything wasn't so glossy or candy-coated. Some realistic paint on the vehicles that would scratch off, realistic look is what I'm trying to get at instead of comic book/action figure look.
Click to expand...
Wow, I really hope none of that ever happens to Halo personally. No offense, but it sounds like you just want a completely different game.
 
Not really, they just made a couple decent Halo's then they sold out to a younger demographic. The only decent Halo since Halo 2 has been Halo 4 and even then there's room for improvement. H4 fell off the most played titles on Xbox Live faster than any other title in the series.
 
dat unpolished experience, though

Bad Company 1 and 2 played better out of the box than the last two games. Shame
 
devilsgrin_6 said:
Not really, they just made a couple decent Halo's then they sold out to a younger demographic. The only decent Halo since Halo 2 has been Halo 4 and even then there's room for improvement. H4 fell off the most played titles on Xbox Live faster than any other title in the series.
Click to expand...

I don't know how you "sell out" making a Halo game, but I tthough Halo Reach, Halo 3: ODST, and Halo Wars were pretty good. Halo 3 was decent to me. Visually, it was all awesome. Tons of cool stuff, and I don't know what's catering to little kids, but unless a game looks like the Crow, it ain't exactly "mature."
 
I never fully get the BF vs COD battle. I love both. To me, they are completely different games, and there's more than enough room for both. COD is your fast and fun shooter, while BF is the team oriented shooter with vehicles and more tactical gameplay.

To me trying to pick which is better is like comparing Forza to Burnout. Two totally different approaches to a similar theme.
 
sharkboy1200 said:
I don't know how you "sell out" making a Halo game, but I tthough Halo Reach, Halo 3: ODST, and Halo Wars were pretty good. Halo 3 was decent to me. Visually, it was all awesome. Tons of cool stuff, and I don't know what's catering to little kids, but unless a game looks like the Crow, it ain't exactly "mature."
Click to expand...
You start marketing to a different demographic which both Halo & Call of Duty have clearly done for a while now. I'd much rather have more of a hardcore, more realistic Halo experience. I also wouldn't mind Call of Duty going back to more of war style game which all of them were up to World At War. Now they are all about making an "action movie" experience in the campaign instead of more open gameplay. I still remember playing CoD1/expansions/CoD2 on PC, those were great experiences fighting along the endless stream of troops that came in to fight with you. Now it's not a war game, it's an action movie game marketed directly to 12-18 year olds when before it was marketed to 18-25 year olds.

Halo:ODST was probably the worst $60 I spent on a Halo title ever. Halo:Reach was so hyped up saying, "Oh, this is our going away present to fans" and outside of the slightly above average campaign, that game was a turd online, everybody knows it. Then H4 was a decent step back in the right direction, but the gameplay was basically trying to mix CoD/Halo with slightly storybook colored graphics. Still, H4 was probably the best one released since H2 honestly. H3 sucked, the gameplay was slow, the vehicles were slow, and the map design/gameplay was terrible. The maps really took me out of H3 minus 2-3 of them. The whole Bubble Shield/Health Regen thing...that wasn't even needed at all.

All they really had to do was make Halo 2 again online with that quality of maps & gameplay while tweaking small things & adding slightly to it & everybody would love it. I mean as far as making sequels. That's their problem though, they always to try fix what's not broken then they hire a bunch of people that don't know how to make quality games anymore or fun gameplay from passionate designers like Halo 1/Halo 2 was. They expanded & hired a bunch of programmers at Bungie, key people left, then MS's marketing took over. That's what I'm talking about. It's fine if you disagree, but that's exactly what happened & I felt like the quality of the product has suffered since H2. I don't think I'm the only one either as most gamers have all but abandoned Halo online now.
 
Battlefield 2 is still better than all online shooters combined, including its successors Battlefield 3 and 4.
 
Tequila Shot said:
Battlefield 2 started it all for me.
Click to expand...

This. Battlefield 2 was, in my opinion, the best game in the series. The expansions that came after were fun as hell too.

Then Battlefield Bad Company happened...

BBC2 multiplayer was fun though.
 
I enjoy all shooters but the one thing i love about Battlefield is the gunplay and the destruction. You just feel like you're there.
 
Ok I opened my copy of BF4 my friend explained some things I played conquest.
This game rocks its kinda hard.cod should be more like this.its more fast paced then cod
But I still like both but this game opened my eyes ll
 
TDbank24 said:
I enjoy all shooters but the one thing i love about Battlefield is the gunplay and the destruction. You just feel like you're there.
Click to expand...


I love the destructible environments. It really makes you think about the cover you are taking.
 
devilsgrin_6 said:
You start marketing to a different demographic which both Halo & Call of Duty have clearly done for a while now. I'd much rather have more of a hardcore, more realistic Halo experience. I also wouldn't mind Call of Duty going back to more of war style game which all of them were up to World At War. Now they are all about making an "action movie" experience in the campaign instead of more open gameplay. I still remember playing CoD1/expansions/CoD2 on PC, those were great experiences fighting along the endless stream of troops that came in to fight with you. Now it's not a war game, it's an action movie game marketed directly to 12-18 year olds when before it was marketed to 18-25 year olds.

Halo:ODST was probably the worst $60 I spent on a Halo title ever. Halo:Reach was so hyped up saying, "Oh, this is our going away present to fans" and outside of the slightly above average campaign, that game was a turd online, everybody knows it. Then H4 was a decent step back in the right direction, but the gameplay was basically trying to mix CoD/Halo with slightly storybook colored graphics. Still, H4 was probably the best one released since H2 honestly. H3 sucked, the gameplay was slow, the vehicles were slow, and the map design/gameplay was terrible. The maps really took me out of H3 minus 2-3 of them. The whole Bubble Shield/Health Regen thing...that wasn't even needed at all.

All they really had to do was make Halo 2 again online with that quality of maps & gameplay while tweaking small things & adding slightly to it & everybody would love it. I mean as far as making sequels. That's their problem though, they always to try fix what's not broken then they hire a bunch of people that don't know how to make quality games anymore or fun gameplay from passionate designers like Halo 1/Halo 2 was. They expanded & hired a bunch of programmers at Bungie, key people left, then MS's marketing took over. That's what I'm talking about. It's fine if you disagree, but that's exactly what happened & I felt like the quality of the product has suffered since H2. I don't think I'm the only one either as most gamers have all but abandoned Halo online now.
Click to expand...
Thank god Halo sells so well because if it met your demands, I don't think I'd ever play it again. It'd be too much of a dull experience for me. I enjoy Halo being it's own thing and I find it funny that you feel that H4 was considered the best when most people seem to consider the worst of the bunch on the 360, MP wise. Reach, 3, and ODST all had longer spots held in the top 20 but 4 sank like a titanic. Hopefully 343 learned their lesson. Also, I didn't know Reach was a turd online, in fact, it's my favorite Halo MP. I certainly know I'm not alone in that regard. Never got into Halo 3, but Reach was the bomb, as was ODST. Fantastic campaign. Wish they'd make another like it. I certainly don't feel like I'm the only one who loved many of the Halo games after 2.
 
Kassen said:
Battlefield 2 is still better than all online shooters combined, including its successors Battlefield 3 and 4.
Click to expand...


All they really need to do is remake BF2 and 1942 using the new engine....and change not much else. Instant GoTY for me.
 
That may not do it for others. Nowadays there's gotta be 70+ weapons and other assorted "things" to unlock.
With the framework of that game, I don't think it'd go far.

But, it's not like remakes are expected to be #1 on the most played lists anyway so maybe I'm fullash!t and it'd do fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back