›
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 Discount Code

PeguPegu
edited April 2010 in Everything Else
Enter this code at eastore.ea.com to receive $20 off Battlefield: Bad Company 2

PAXEAST842

Comments

  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    This game is awesome.
  • ChurbaChurba
    edited April 2010
    This game is awesome.
    I dunno. It's kinda meh - Just the same thing as every other psudo-realistic "Modern warfare"(The Theme, not the Franchise) Game, the only difference being that instead of having tin shacks that somehow can stop a 122MM HEAT round, instead fall apart ludicrously easily under the comparatively gentle caress of a 40mm grenade - in ways that seem oddly familiar the more times you do it. We've switched Adamantium scenery for Styrofoam, but otherwise, it's just the same old dance to the same old song.

    I've played a fair bit of BFBC2, and to me, it just feels like BF2, with some updated guns and vehicles, and some fancy fall-apart walls. Not that this is a bad thing - BF2 was and is a good game - but frankly, it just seems like a retread of a game they've released before, with some new guns, and the same gimmick that Red faction has gone over three times now, and not half as well done.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Luke BurrageLuke Burrage
    I've only heard disappointing things about Bad Company 2 from friends who play a lot of BF2. BF2 only barely runs on my old PC, so I didn't bother trying out Bad Company 2.

    And, to be honest, compared to Natural Selection, BF2 feels soooo shallow. Sure, there are lots of vehicles, but nothing I ever do seems to matter at all, while in NS even a remarkably average player like myself can do stuff for the team that can make the difference between winning and losing.
  • HMTKSteveHMTKSteve
    As a console gamer I find BC2 to be the only 'war' shooter worth playing. I have a good group of friends that I play with and I find that makes all the difference in the world.

    Just last night we managed to steal an Apache from the opposing team (they landed it after sustaining heavy dmg). I ran over and fixed it (engineer). After that one of my friends and I took it back into the sky and destroyed the enemy strong point from the air. Us using the Apache also denied the enemy use of the vehicle.

    My only complaint is that on some maps you can enter the enemy spawn point while in others you can not. This can cause a problem when you have a player on the the opposing side who decides to camp out in your spawn and kill ppl as soon as they respawn.

    I doubt Rym or Scott would like this game because you level up in MP to unlock better weapons and gear. I recall they hated this same thing about TF2.
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    Correction: It was achievements you had to get to progress in TF2, which lead to people doing stupid shit. XP, I assume, you amass from just playing properly.
  • KieyKiey
    Correction: It was achievements you had to get to progress in TF2, which lead to people doing stupid shit. XP, I assume, you amass from just playing properly.
    This is true, you are actually rewarded more for being a team player. You get more points as a medic for healing and reviving then for killing, likewise with engineer for repairing. Additionally you get more points when you do things with your squad, as opposed to other people on your team, usually something like 3x the normal amount.
  • ChurbaChurba
    Just last night we managed to steal an Apache from the opposing team (they landed it after sustaining heavy dmg). I ran over and fixed it (engineer). After that one of my friends and I took it back into the sky and destroyed the enemy strong point from the air. Us using the Apache also denied the enemy use of the vehicle.
    Oh yeah, I love doing that in BF2. Used to do that all the time.

    Seriously - I'm not saying it's a bad game. I'm just saying it's the same game as before, with a single added gimmick.
  • AndrewAndrew
    Seriously - I'm not saying it's a bad game. I'm just saying it's the same game as before, with a single added gimmick.
    It's not really a gimmick. Destructible terrain changes the gameplay quite significantly. Additionally, they've added a new game mode which is significantly better than before.
  • ChurbaChurba
    It's not really a gimmick. Destructible terrain changes the gameplay quite significantly.
    If it's not a gimmick, then please, explain why it was done better in Red Faction, which came out in 2001?
    And a single added multiplayer mode? Well, yes, they did. They added Deathmatch. Rush is just Conquest(A mainstay of the Battlefield series) with one team being awarded some stationary points, and the other team is to destroy them rather than capture them - Must've taken them a long time to come up with that one, almost a whole coffee break, I'd say. However, they also removed the commander position, Three soldier classes and the ability to play or practice against bots, so it's a moot point, really. EA Giveth, and EA taketh Away.
  • OmnutiaOmnutia
    It's also £30 and not Tribes 3, what's up with that?
  • AndrewAndrew
    image
  • WalkerWalker
    If it's not a gimmick, then please, explain why it was done better in Red Faction, which came out in 2001?
    A gimmick is something that is slapped on, usually as an afterthought, that has no real effect on the final product but makes it stand out from the competition in the consumer's mind. I haven't played the game much, but if it introduces a significant change to the gameplay, as Andrew says, it isn't a gimmick (regardless of the fact that the technology has been done better in other games).
  • ElJoe0ElJoe0
    edited April 2010
    Am I the only person on this whole forum who read the title of the thread and thought "Yay discounts!"? Thanks Pegu!
    Post edited by ElJoe0 on
  • ChurbaChurba
    edited April 2010
    A gimmick is something that is slapped on, usually as an afterthought, that has no real effect on the final product but makes it stand out from the competition in the consumer's mind. I haven't played the game much, but if it introduces a significant change to the gameplay, as Andrew says, it isn't a gimmick (regardless of the fact that the technology has been done better in other games).
    Good Man! That's just what I was looking for - an actual response - and I'll concede the point. Too Bad Andrew couldn't come up with such a simple explanation.

    So, we now have scenery made of styrofoam. WHEEEEEEE! It's still just the same old thing as every other Present-day war FPS that's been released in the last few years.

    The Way I see it, this is like the iPad. Yes, It's a big iPod touch, the same as we've seen before with some slight differences. That doesn't make it inherently bad - after all, that's exactly what some people want. But that doesn't make it a revolution to the market. It just means that it's the same over again, but slightly different, and that's what some people want. But, some people are still going to metaphorically drop to their knees and enthusiastically fellate it, until the next big swinging dick comes along.
    (Edit - Not a specific commentary about anyone here, but more of a general comment about how people are reacting to the game)
    Am I the only person on this whole forum who read the title of the thread and thought "Yay discounts!"? Thanks Pegu!
    I'm saving up to buy Just Cause 2, and I don't really need to play a game which I don't enjoy as much as the games that came before it in the series, which I already own.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • AndrewAndrew
    Good Man! That's just what I was looking for - an actual response - and I'll concede the point. Too Bad Andrew couldn't come up with such a simple explanation.
    Too bad I didn't want to point out that you were purposefully obfuscating the idea of a gimmick in order to start an argument?
  • ChurbaChurba
    edited April 2010
    Good Man! That's just what I was looking for - an actual response - and I'll concede the point. Too Bad Andrew couldn't come up with such a simple explanation.
    Too bad I didn't want to point out that you were purposefully obfuscating the idea of a gimmick in order to start an argument?
    Apparently, you are now think you are Psychic, and seem to think yourself able to tell me exactly what my motivations and thoughts are. Please Contact Randi Immediately.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • KieyKiey
    edited April 2010
    It's not really a gimmick. Destructible terrain changes the gameplay quite significantly.
    If it's not a gimmick, then please, explain why it was done better in Red Faction, which came out in 2001?
    Well Red Faction in 2001 only allowed you to blow up the ground really, and some walls. In BC2 basically everything is destructible (aside from these cement cubes which I don't really understand why they can't.) But the importance is that the destructibility, especially in Rush mode can completely change the tactics of a battle. In the beginning of a round you might be able to run straight for the defender's base when attacking, since you'll have trees to block their line of sight of you, but once those trees are gone it's suddenly a lot more difficult to run across an open field.

    Also while Rush mode might not be the most novel and unique game mode, I think it's the best way to play BC2. It's far less chaotic then conquest. The maps just have a better balance and flow to them then the other modes.
    Post edited by Kiey on
  • ChurbaChurba
    Well Red Faction in 2001 only allowed you to blow up the ground really, and some walls.
    Actually, it was pretty much everything, except for a few small, curious exceptions - for example, you could destroy the wall around a door, but you couldn't destroy the door. And those curiously indestructible office partitions. However, Red Faction 3 had even better environmental destruction than either Red Faction or BFBC2 - I can think of very few exceptions to the "Everything can be destroyed" rule.

    On a side note, Breach is looking really good - I'm looking forward to having a crack at that.
Sign In or Register to comment.