Battlefield: Bad Company Hands-on w/ New images!

[Grovestreet]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/794/794427p1.html

All Images Here! (http://uk.media.xbox360.ign.com/media/713/713943/imgs_1.html)

Considering every single object is destructable in the game, this is my most anticipated FPS, including COD4. I've always wanted an FPS with vehicles and completely destroyable environments, this is going to rock!

[OmniCloud]

I dunno, COD4 just owned this IMO...plus it's an 08 release...too bland on the story imo...

blowing up stuff is nice, but you can get Mercenaries for that right?

[jaxmkii]

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/794/794427p1.html

All Images Here! (http://uk.media.xbox360.ign.com/media/713/713943/imgs_1.html)

Considering every single object is destructable in the game, this is my most anticipated FPS, including COD4. I've always wanted an FPS with vehicles and completely destroyable environments, this is going to rock!

i'll belive that when im playing the game.

[Grovestreet]

i'll belive that when im playing the game.

There has been 2 previews now and they both say that everything can be destroyed.

[yoshaw]

These realtime screens are a farcry from what cg pics EA has been showing in magazines and websites before this. Should had known better not to trust EA >_<

Madden, Army of Two n now this. Always fall for EA's shit. Damn!

[VG Aficionado]

You could at least have posted the links to the PS3 section.

All of the destruction I see here seems very canned, hardly anything like what is seen in Crysis, but that would be asking for too much I guess. Killzone, MGS4 and others will have destructible environments, so I'm afraid there's nothing so unique to this title that might excite me in the least, even less taking into account it's a multiplatform EA title and that I can't stand all these average war games.

[masteratt]

I'm no developer but a key rule is: Never build a game around one gimmicky feature.

This game will be fun for about 10 minutes.

Multiplayer should be better of course but with much better multiplayer games for each format, this game screams "brand name sells it".

[GTShotoKen]

I'm no developer but a key rule is: Never build a game around one gimmicky feature.

This game will be fun for about 10 minutes.

Multiplayer should be better of course but with much better multiplayer games for each format, this game screams "brand name sells it".

You will already know if you like this game or not if you've played any other battlefield game. It seems like it won't be any different, except that the environments are destructible.

[curryking1]

I pretty much agree with Omni lol.

COD4 is also really stealing my attention, that game like.. matches or surpasses even this games bullshots basically, and I really don't see this as being a great addition to the Battlefield game library. But of course the difference is that it's all destructible with the graphics comment. Or that at least accounts for something of that difference.... Either way, that's not the real point for me lol.

I really don't see how this is making Battlefield fun or.. I dunno, I'm just skeptical for it, no more, no less. Ever since it was announced for consoles so long ago I was always skeptical about this one.

[WolfWooD]

Man im gonna get that game for my pc. hope its comes there anyway :p Gonna be awesome

[dendj55]

IMO the game looks decent, but as of now I am more excited about COD4, Haze and even UT3.

[Z]

thank god the game is an 08 release. it is overcrowded as it is till end of 07. I want some space dammit!

*continues figuring out purchase plan for the holiday*

[SleazyBig slim]

Warhawk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Battlefield to the umpteenth power! Its just plain more fun. BF is lucky to have a single player, or else it probably wouldn't do too good on PS3.

[Kabbage]

i'll belive that when im playing the game. Same here

[jaxmkii]

You will already know if you like this game or not if you've played any other battlefield game. It seems like it won't be any different, except that the environments are destructible.

Jax doesnt seem very impressed with the title.

[woundingchaney]

For the love of God, Jax please let the shit pictures go.

[jaxmkii]

awww...

[GTShotoKen]

Yeah, just like shit with jellybeans on top....delicious! ;)

[TEEDA]

I want a red faction 3 lol. but this game looks good yeah !

[GTShotoKen]

Dammit just give me a next-gen Black. I just want to see big, loud guns blazing and everything (and everyone) falling apart!!!!! :lol:

[Nameless]

The game looks good to me, but I have to admit COD4 has my full attention for FPS... Honestly I will enjoy COD4's single player gameplay the best, because I just don't like playing multiplayer 1st person shooters.
I will more than likely log more hours playing Warhawk or Socom Confrontations...

[Z]

Dammit just give me a next-gen Black. I just want to see big, loud guns blazing and everything (and everyone) falling apart!!!!! :lol:
it's in the works. and people 'hate' EA...
The game looks good to me, but I have to admit COD4 has my full attention for FPS... Honestly I will enjoy COD4's single player gameplay the best, because I just don't like playing multiplayer 1st person shooters.
I will more than likely log more hours playing Warhawk or Socom Confrontations...

why are people deciding between a game coming out in a few months (CoD4) to a game coming out a year after (BF:BC)? it's not like I'll be choosing to purchase one over the other. I am more occupied about what FPS to by this holiday with Killzone, Haze, Army of Two and others releasing around the same time.

[GTShotoKen]

it's in the works. and people 'hate' EA...

I thought Black was made by Criterion?

I don't really care who makes what as long as the game is actually good. I loved Black and know of its potential in next gen when it comes to destruction (explosions...explosions everywhere)!!!!!

I feel kind of awkward now that a thread about battlefield only served the purpose to get me re-excited about another game....

awwwwww.....

[Epix]

I thought Black was made by Criterion? Developed by Criterion, published by EA.

[Z]

I thought Black was made by Criterion?



and Criterion is owned by EA. one of those titles that some don't feel they are EA made like Battle Field. ;)

I don't really care who makes what as long as the game is actually good.
that's what I'm saying. good games are good games. that is why I love EA and Ubi.

[Segitz]

and Criterion is owned by EA. one of those titles that some don't feel they are EA made like Battle Field. ;)


that's what I'm saying. good games are good games. that is why I love EA and Ubi.

Thats because, EA trusts Criterion I think, or else they wouldnt give them as much artistic freedom as they do now (same with Valve, CryTek etc.).

Criterion Games is a good studio with very talented people (although I still think, the last few Burnout games were "more of the same" (still 2 and 3 were the best))

[Z]

they maybe 'more of the same', but that 'same' is still beyond anything else. only MotorStorm can be grouped with it and even then, it would look slow, limited and boring next to Burnout. ;)

I really want to see the crash animations and FX of the new Burnout!

[Segitz]

they maybe 'more of the same', but that 'same' is still beyond anything else. only MotorStorm can be grouped with it and even then, it would look slow, limited and boring next to Burnout. ;)

I really want to see the crash animations and FX of the new Burnout!

Hmm... I dunno, usually I like twitchy games (I was a god in Q3A back in time :D) but Burnout just isnt my style. The driving physics dont even want you to be god, just to avoid traffic is the game (in race mode) and hit stuff with small chance (in crash mode)...

I reall liked 2/3 (never played one though) but the rest (esp. the PSP version) were just more of the same, sadly.

This is the EA way of releasing games. Make a good IP and then refresh once a year (happened to my alltime favourite franchise NFS, were the first 4 or so were great and now... I dont even bother anymore, I get it every 3 or 4 years max). And this practice sort of proves to be profitable, sadly. I get bored VERY easily by repeating patterns (Most game, esp. if they dont have a story mode, I dont finish).

But then again, I am pretty non-mainstream, so I am not very profitable to begin with :D

[GTShotoKen]

I would love to have seen you play back in your Q3A days.

I was a pretty damn good online yet I could never beat Xero on Nightmare. I still think it's impossible.

Anyways, I can't wait to actually get some gameplay footage from this title. I'm not the biggest fan of Battlefield, but I know the game can be damn good if you can get the right people. Titan mode in 2142 was a god-send to the series. I hope Bad Company has something like that.

[Segitz]

I would love to have seen you play back in your Q3A days.

I was a pretty damn good online yet I could never beat Xero on Nightmare. I still think it's impossible.

Anyways, I can't wait to actually get some gameplay footage from this title. I'm not the biggest fan of Battlefield, but I know the game can be damn good if you can get the right people. Titan mode in 2142 was a god-send to the series. I hope Bad Company has something like that.

Ya, me neither, but I goot to the second (or so) to last tier on Nightmare :D

My nick was "DerMetzger" (TheButcher) back then. But I never bothered for clans or so. I am a loner :D

[Z]

I get it every 3 or 4 years max
and that is the key. for someone who already played the game and a sequel or two consecutively, there would be little incentive for him to, yet again, play the new offering coming out a year after the last. skip a few sequels and you'll enjoy a franchise more. I am talking about the annual release franchises.

[Segitz]

and that is the key. for someone who already played the game and a sequel or two consecutively, there would be little incentive for him to, yet again, play the new offering coming out a year after the last. skip a few sequels and you'll enjoy a franchise more. I am talking about the annual release franchises.

Maybe I should have added the words rental or from a friend... The last NFS I bought was Porsche Unleashed. And this is surely not, what EA has in mind.

My problem is, that most gaming sites and magazines just dont point this out too well (esp. with Fifa). It is exactly the same with other tracks... NOTHING ELSE. Sadly. Why do these games get between 70 and 90 all the time? They are ok games, not too good imho (on a scale between 0 and 100, the NFS series since Underground were 65 MAX). A little better than average, nothing more, yet games in the scale of GT or Forza "only" get 85-95, although they are leaps and bounds better (rant over :D)

I think, yearly releases are too short. At least a two year dev time makes a game good (speaking from my experience). Games at the scale of GT or MGS take twice/thrice that time to develop, and it is worth it too (else these games would not be developed at all). I just dont like the watering down of experience, I mean back in the Amiga days, gaming was core only. Something elitairy sort of and now gaming has gone mainstream. Nothing too bad though but I am still more of a core gamer (I only play MUCH less than back then :D)


Now back to topic on hand...


I am not too sure about this. As I said above, these iterations above iterations are a bit meh imho. Battlefield 1942 was a great game, never bothered about the rest though (played the demo of 2). I dont think, BC can live up to its antecessors!