Battlefield BC: The beta is up

Commented on 2008-03-25 20:52:02 In reply to miketuck3r

Posted by miketuck3r

Jirgen pls realise the difference between a demo and a beta

I cant get in to any games at present, theres a message saying the is huge demand on the servers and they are looking into it

Hey, I wasn't criticizing this one overall, you'd know it if I was.

I think a lot of other people are being much harsher on this one (too harsh), I hear some people saying that Vietnam and MC are better than this.

In reply to

aphex187

Commented on 2008-03-25 21:41:18

Hehe Vietnam 'is' better than this :P

Have to agree with the jaggies and im seeing a lot of image tearing.

As far as the lag and not being able to get in, you can't just throw your hands up in the air and scream beta! EA should of known what to expect, what with the amount of keys given out.

In reply to

thesquire

Commented on 2008-03-25 22:02:06

For some reason the mp4 bittorrent download doesn't work for me. Anyone else have that problem?

In reply to

Real720

Commented on 2008-03-25 22:15:11

Manager, do you think this game is similar to cod4 in terms of realism and difficulty?

In reply to

Jigen

Commented on 2008-03-25 22:43:36

I think the thing some people were saying, and I basically agree, is how SOLID a game feels. It has to do with everything from sound effects to hit direction. It also has a lot of gameplay elements involved. It can take quite a lot of bullets to kill someone in this game, and you can even see people's health bars drop. So like 20 bullets from a rifle to kill someone? That doesn't 'feel' good to most people (if not everyone). This game isn't as good as Halo 3 or COD4 in that way. I would say those two are actually some of the best in that way, the BF series on PC wasn't ever quite as good feeling, but it was close.

In reply to

Baleur

Commented on 2008-03-25 23:13:49 In reply to Manager

Posted by Manager

You can accelerate with A and brake with B too.

Yeah but how are you gonna move the turret then? :P

In reply to

Manager

Commented on 2008-03-26 00:19:45 In reply to thesquire

Posted by Real720

Manager, do you think this game is similar to cod4 in terms of realism and difficulty?

It's simular in the way you move, and I'd say they are pretty similar with how weapons are handled. I barely touched the MP part of CoD4, so it's hard to compare. I did finish the single player campaign, but... I mean, BF hasn't been that much about realism. Sure, there are "real" vehicles etc, but DICE more often talk about having fun than realism á la Ghost Recon 1/Operation Flashpoint. It's hard to talk about realism when you have a game where you are stealing gold or taking over flags on a battlefield, even though the latter is more about territory.

Posted by Baleur

Yeah but how are you gonna move the turret then? :P

Touché, when I was shooting the lag was driving the tank for me. :p

Posted by thesquire

For some reason the mp4 bittorrent download doesn't work for me. Anyone else have that problem?

You've probably already seen this in the Feedback forum, but the seeder has been rebooted and should work fine now.

Jigen:
I think it's more than that. I never really enjoyed Halo 3 or COD4 that much - sure, they were good games, but I never got the feeling that I actually wanted to play more, "Only one more game". All the Battlefield series has given me that. And to me, it's not about how people are injured or if you can see their status - it's deeper than that, and I personally enjoy BF more for some reason. I totally agree with you though, it feels solid. But have you tried doing single bursts/shots? From the gameplay videos I've seen from the beta, everyone thinks they can just do a multiburst of 30 shots towards an enemy that is 100 meters away. It's simple logic, but particularly BF concentrates on this as it's so wide open.
If you are 100 meters away, and do single shots, you can take down an enemy with 4-5 well-placed shots, easily. It's a spray fest when you're close though, but what game isn't? Everyone's jumping around, dodging bullets. Close combat is only realistic in games where you die by one/two hit shots.

In reply to

[quote=Real720]Manager, do you think this game is similar to cod4 in terms of realism and difficulty?[/quote]

It's simular in the way you move, and I'd say they are pretty similar with how weapons are handled. I barely touched the MP part of CoD4, so it's hard to compare. I did finish the single player campaign, but... I mean, BF hasn't been that much about realism. Sure, there are "real" vehicles etc, but DICE more often talk about having fun than realism á la Ghost Recon 1/Operation Flashpoint. It's hard to talk about realism when you have a game where you are stealing gold or taking over flags on a battlefield, even though the latter is more about territory.

[quote=Baleur]
Yeah but how are you gonna move the turret then? :P[/quote]

Touché, when I was shooting the lag was driving the tank for me. :p

[quote=thesquire]For some reason the mp4 bittorrent download doesn't work for me. Anyone else have that problem?[/quote]

You've probably already seen this in the Feedback forum, but the seeder has been rebooted and should work fine now.

Jigen:
I think it's more than that. I never really enjoyed Halo 3 or COD4 that much - sure, they were good games, but I never got the feeling that I actually wanted to play more, "Only one more game". All the Battlefield series has given me that. And to me, it's not about how people are injured or if you can see their status - it's deeper than that, and I personally enjoy BF more for some reason. I totally agree with you though, it feels solid. But have you tried doing single bursts/shots? From the gameplay videos I've seen from the beta, everyone thinks they can just do a multiburst of 30 shots towards an enemy that is 100 meters away. It's simple logic, but particularly BF concentrates on this as it's so wide open.
If you are 100 meters away, and do single shots, you can take down an enemy with 4-5 well-placed shots, easily. It's a spray fest when you're close though, but what game isn't? Everyone's jumping around, dodging bullets. Close combat is only realistic in games where you die by one/two hit shots.

Jigen

Commented on 2008-03-26 00:26:58 In reply to Manager

Posted by Manager

Jigen:
I think it's more than that. I never really enjoyed Halo 3 or COD4 that much - sure, they were good games, but I never got the feeling that I actually wanted to play more, "Only one more game". All the Battlefield series has given me that. And to me, it's not about how people are injured or if you can see their status - it's deeper than that, and I personally enjoy BF more for some reason. I totally agree with you though, it feels solid. But have you tried doing single bursts/shots? From the gameplay videos I've seen from the beta, everyone thinks they can just do a multiburst of 30 shots towards an enemy that is 100 meters away. It's simple logic, but particularly BF concentrates on this as it's so wide open.
If you are 100 meters away, and do single shots, you can take down an enemy with 4-5 well-placed shots, easily.

I agree that COD4/Halo 3 and the BF games are really different kinds of games. I've liked both from time to time. I haven't figured out how to change my weapon firing modes, but I did think of it, especially when one of the assault class weapons only seemed to fire single shots.

There are different kinds of weapons too, and some do more damage than others. I noticed the shotguns do seem to be one hit kills in close range, so I was thinking of trying out them next (hard to get in games). I was probably exaggerating with 20 shots, but one of the assault class weapons took at least 8 actual hits (once again, the health bars make these things plain).

One other thing, it seems the areas in this game are a little smaller than a typical BF2 map, those maps scale, so I would say it's larger than the BF2 16 player versions of maps, but smaller than the 32 player versions...

Still the environ destruction does seem to work really well, and the BF games have always been really picky with blast radius on tank fire and stuff like that and this one seems to be a little better (more radius).

In reply to

[quote=Manager]
Jigen:
I think it's more than that. I never really enjoyed Halo 3 or COD4 that much - sure, they were good games, but I never got the feeling that I actually wanted to play more, "Only one more game". All the Battlefield series has given me that. And to me, it's not about how people are injured or if you can see their status - it's deeper than that, and I personally enjoy BF more for some reason. I totally agree with you though, it feels solid. But have you tried doing single bursts/shots? From the gameplay videos I've seen from the beta, everyone thinks they can just do a multiburst of 30 shots towards an enemy that is 100 meters away. It's simple logic, but particularly BF concentrates on this as it's so wide open.
If you are 100 meters away, and do single shots, you can take down an enemy with 4-5 well-placed shots, easily.[/quote]

I agree that COD4/Halo 3 and the BF games are really different kinds of games.  I've liked both from time to time.  I haven't figured out how to change my weapon firing modes, but I did think of it, especially when one of the assault class weapons only seemed to fire single shots.

There are different kinds of weapons too, and some do more damage than others.  I noticed the shotguns do seem to be one hit kills in close range, so I was thinking of trying out them next (hard to get in games).  I was probably exaggerating with 20 shots, but one of the assault class weapons took at least 8 actual hits (once again, the health bars make these things plain).

One other thing, it seems the areas in this game are a little smaller than a typical BF2 map, those maps scale, so I would say it's larger than the BF2 16 player versions of maps, but smaller than the 32 player versions...

Still the environ destruction does seem to work really well, and the BF games have always been really picky with blast radius on tank fire and stuff like that and this one seems to be a little better (more radius).

GangstaNip

Commented on 2008-03-26 01:52:18

wow this game is crazy, i watched a helicopter crash in to a tank.rofl.

In reply to

crookedmind

Commented on 2008-03-26 04:22:13

Looks just like Vanilla to me, same 'first to the vehicles wins' bullshit only with better sound - yet more annoying vocal annoucements, lousy damage system, etc, etc...Yeah, think it might be rent worthy.
But a PC version would be better simply from a mod standpoint, think Id buy that instead.

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2008-03-26 04:36:51 In reply to crookedmind

Posted by crookedmind

Looks just like Vanilla to me, same 'first to the vehicles wins' bullshit only with better sound - yet more annoying vocal annoucements, lousy damage system, etc, etc...Yeah, think it might be rent worthy.
But a PC version would be better simply from a mod standpoint, think Id buy that instead.

There would never be a PC version of this game. The next PC BF game (do I have to count Heroes?) will have a chain of command. There will be squads and commanders at the very least, and rumors are that teams will be broken down further, adding another layer to the chain. Kits will also be balanced quite differently, although I do consider it a real possibility that DICE will continue to consolidate classes (a la Modern Combat and 2142).

I'd prefer they stuck to their approach in BF2, where classes must rely heavily on each other to form successful teams/squads.. but so long as it's balanced well I'm not sure I'll care too much how they approach it. I just hope they stop locking basic kit equipment in BF3. Having to unlock a gun is one thing, but critical equipment should be available to the player from day one.

I sorta doubt that it will devolve into a "first to vehicles wins" type game, since BF has never been that simple. I've heard the same complaint about BF2 and 2142 and frankly people aren't playing the game correctly if that's what they think it's all about.

Infantry squads are very effective in BF2, even against armor. Vehicles are pretty well balanced too. Armor has to fear infantry, and helos, and helos have to fear jets and anti-air armor--engi's keep armor alive, medics keep infantry alive, etc.

This seems to simplify the same formula, so hopefully once teams get more coordinated and stop just blasting away at the environments to see the cool effects, you'll see a more stable and balanced online game appear.

In reply to

[quote=crookedmind]Looks just like Vanilla to me, same 'first to the vehicles wins' bullshit only with better sound - yet more annoying vocal annoucements, lousy damage system, etc, etc...Yeah, think it might be rent worthy.
But a PC version would be better simply from a mod standpoint, think Id buy that instead.[/quote]

There would never be a PC version of this game.  The next PC BF game (do I have to count Heroes?) will have a chain of command.  There will be squads and commanders at the very least, and rumors are that teams will be broken down further, adding another layer to the chain.  Kits will also be balanced quite differently, although I do consider it a real possibility that DICE will continue to consolidate classes (a la Modern Combat and 2142).

I'd prefer they stuck to their approach in BF2, where classes must rely heavily on each other to form successful teams/squads.. but so long as it's balanced well I'm not sure I'll care too much how they approach it.  I just hope they stop locking basic kit equipment in BF3.  Having to unlock a gun is one thing, but critical equipment should be available to the player from day one.

I sorta doubt that it will devolve into a "first to vehicles wins" type game, since BF has [i]never[/i] been that simple.  I've heard the same complaint about BF2 and 2142 and frankly people aren't playing the game correctly if that's what they think it's all about.

Infantry squads are very effective in BF2, even against armor.  Vehicles are pretty well balanced too.  Armor has to fear infantry, and helos, and helos have to fear jets and anti-air armor--engi's keep armor alive, medics keep infantry alive, etc.

This seems to simplify the same formula, so hopefully once teams get more coordinated and stop just blasting away at the environments to see the cool effects, you'll see a more stable and balanced online game appear.

graf1k

Commented on 2008-03-26 05:52:39

I thought the actual gameplay of the beta was decent but man early on it was impossible to get in a game. EA and their servers no doubt. Some minor annoyances like no kill cam, no rumble when you get shot and easily the biggest problem with the beta is way the games are set up. You can't invite a friend to a game at all it seems, ranked or unranked and no lobby system which in 2008 is unforgivable IMO. Hopefully the final product has it because otherwise the destructible environments are the only thing I see that I am really impressed with and thats not nearly enough to buy another FPS anymore.

In reply to

anm8rjp

Commented on 2008-03-26 06:53:43 In reply to graf1k

Posted by graf1k

I thought the actual gameplay of the beta was decent but man early on it was impossible to get in a game. EA and their servers no doubt. Some minor annoyances like no kill cam, no rumble when you get shot and easily the biggest problem with the beta is way the games are set up. You can't invite a friend to a game at all it seems, ranked or unranked and no lobby system which in 2008 is unforgivable IMO. Hopefully the final product has it because otherwise the destructible environments are the only thing I see that I am really impressed with and thats not nearly enough to buy another FPS anymore.

I completely agree with most everything... the graphics are pretty decent, but not quite as good as COD4, (which has set the bar). Gameplay... respawn gametypes are not my kind of thing... I prefer no respawns and this type of gameflow in battlefield games doesn't lend itself to that really, from what I experienced. The weapons feel didn't do it for me. I could shoot someone multiple times that would have killed them 3x over in hardcore in COD4.

I'm sadly sticking with COD4, it looks like this Summer, I might gamefly it.

Destructible environments, new gametype, a bit better graphics than BF Modern Combat and thats it. COD4 is still my number 1 game.

It could improve a lot, granted that its only a Beta, but it leaves a lot to be desired, and I'm sure the flow and gameplay feel will not change, which has not sold me.

In reply to

[quote=graf1k]I thought the actual gameplay of the beta was decent but man early on it was impossible to get in a game. EA and their servers no doubt. Some minor annoyances like no kill cam, no rumble when you get shot and easily the biggest problem with the beta is way the games are set up. You can't invite a friend to a game at all it seems, ranked or unranked and no lobby system which in 2008 is unforgivable IMO. Hopefully the final product has it because otherwise the destructible environments are the only thing I see that I am really impressed with and thats not nearly enough to buy another FPS anymore.[/quote]

I completely agree with most everything... the graphics are pretty decent, but not quite as good as COD4, (which has set the bar).  Gameplay... respawn gametypes are not my kind of thing... I prefer no respawns and this type of gameflow in battlefield games doesn't lend itself to that really, from what I experienced.  The weapons feel didn't do it for me.  I could shoot someone multiple times that would have killed them 3x over in hardcore in COD4.

I'm sadly sticking with COD4, it looks like this Summer, I might gamefly it.

Destructible environments, new gametype, a bit better graphics than BF Modern Combat and thats it.  COD4 is still my number 1 game.

It could improve a lot, granted that its only a Beta, but it leaves a lot to be desired, and I'm sure the flow and gameplay feel will not change, which has not sold me.

GriftGFX

Commented on 2008-03-26 07:05:13

I could shoot someone multiple times that would have killed them 3x over in hardcore in COD4.

I love COD4 as much (more) than the next guy, but Hardcore mode is sorta bullshit. I wish you could filter out all of the HC servers in the browser, because it's entirely too popular considering what a complete afterthought the whole mode is.

BF shouldn't feel like Call of Duty, at all. The day that BF opts for regenerative health, hotkeys for chucking frags and run and gun gameplay over an emphasis on team work.. well that's the end of Battlefield. BF should be somewhat slower and more methodical than Call of Duty.. and it also represents a greater variety in gameplay than any other FPS franchise out there.

Keep in mind I'm not trying to argue that you're wrong in choosing COD4 over Bad Company, I'm likely going to continue to keep COD4 as my primary FPS of choice for at least another year as well. They're just vastly different franchises and that's a good thing. We don't need more clones in this genre, variety is the spice of life etc etc..

It's sad that there's no conquest mode (in the beta, at least). That seems very un-BF.

In reply to

[quote]I could shoot someone multiple times that would have killed them 3x over in hardcore in COD4.[/quote]

I love COD4 as much (more) than the next guy, but Hardcore mode is sorta bullshit.  I wish you could filter out all of the HC servers in the browser, because it's entirely too popular considering what a complete afterthought the whole mode is.

BF shouldn't feel like Call of Duty, at all.  The day that BF opts for regenerative health, hotkeys for chucking frags and run and gun gameplay over an emphasis on team work.. well that's the end of Battlefield.  BF should be somewhat slower and more methodical than Call of Duty.. and it also represents a greater variety in gameplay than any other FPS franchise out there.

Keep in mind I'm not trying to argue that you're wrong in choosing COD4 over Bad Company, I'm likely going to continue to keep COD4 as my primary FPS of choice for at least another year as well.  They're just vastly different franchises and that's a good thing.  We don't need more clones in this genre, variety is the spice of life etc etc..

It's sad that there's no conquest mode (in the beta, at least).  That seems very un-BF.

Biffo

Commented on 2008-03-26 09:51:47 In reply to graf1k

Posted by graf1k

I thought the actual gameplay of the beta was decent but man early on it was impossible to get in a game. EA and their servers no doubt. Some minor annoyances like no kill cam, no rumble when you get shot and easily the biggest problem with the beta is way the games are set up. You can't invite a friend to a game at all it seems, ranked or unranked and no lobby system which in 2008 is unforgivable IMO. Hopefully the final product has it because otherwise the destructible environments are the only thing I see that I am really impressed with and thats not nearly enough to buy another FPS anymore.

IGN mentioned somewhere the devs will have a friends/lobby type of system for the full game, just a shame it wasnt in the beta.

Im pretty sure theyre will be a conquest mode aswell Grift, Hell it wouldn't be BF without it. They definetly wouldnt launch a game with just the one game mode I dont think as you couldnt get away with it anymore, you need at least conquest aswell.
My reckoning is they just included this gametype to see how well the public get it as if there was a choice a lot of people might only try play the old conquest gametype.

In reply to

[quote=graf1k]I thought the actual gameplay of the beta was decent but man early on it was impossible to get in a game. EA and their servers no doubt. Some minor annoyances like no kill cam, no rumble when you get shot and easily the biggest problem with the beta is way the games are set up. You can't invite a friend to a game at all it seems, ranked or unranked and no lobby system which in 2008 is unforgivable IMO. Hopefully the final product has it because otherwise the destructible environments are the only thing I see that I am really impressed with and thats not nearly enough to buy another FPS anymore.[/quote]

IGN mentioned somewhere the devs will have a friends/lobby type of system for the full game, just a shame it wasnt in the beta.

Im pretty sure theyre will be a conquest mode aswell Grift, Hell it wouldn't be BF without it. They definetly wouldnt launch a game with just the one game mode I dont think as you couldnt get away with it anymore, you need at least conquest aswell.
My reckoning is they just included this gametype to see how well the public get it as if there was a choice a lot of people might only try play the old conquest gametype.

squarejawhero

Commented on 2008-03-26 10:34:56

Oh christ, watching that I had BF2/BFV addiction flashbacks and was cursing Snoopers for being a poor team player and dying by his own hand... AS IF IT WAS ME.

I predict many a sleepless night. Hopefully I won't get into the beta because I really could do without getting addicted to it right now...

/hunts for keys

In reply to

squarejawhero

Commented on 2008-03-26 10:37:12

Incidentally BF is nothing like COD4 in anything other than it's an FPS wargame. It plays completely differently and has a teamplay requirement. So quit it with the comparasions folks! You either like a slow, measured pace or the fast run and gun gameplay, no need to compare the two as they're far too dissimilar to play.

In reply to

aphex187

Commented on 2008-03-26 11:39:51

I wouldn't say this game is slow paced, i mean on BF2 i could go for a pee, make a coffee and come back and still not be dead! This you wouldn't be able to answer the phone with out some one blowing you up lol!

Ive been really critical of this game and its because ive had the joy of upgrading my PC, the 360 in my eyes dosen't cut it for me with the visuals any more, but heres hoping for 'that' PC port eh?

Oh and anything that has me messing about with the TV settings is still a no no damnit!

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2008-03-26 12:10:05 In reply to aphex187

Posted by aphex187

I wouldn't say this game is slow paced, i mean on BF2 i could go for a pee, make a coffee and come back and still not be dead! This you wouldn't be able to answer the phone with out some one blowing you up lol!

If you're like, prone in a well controlled corner of a 64 player map maybe. BF2 may be methodical but the action is intense.

And no PC port please, they just need to work on BF3.

In reply to

Se777eN

Commented on 2008-03-26 12:13:31

Beta needs freind support cant play on your own game is lag free but i hate all the red and blue arrows on the screen you can see the enemy miles away in a building and all sorts. Takes ages to kill people as well. i need more time..

In reply to

Biffo

Commented on 2008-03-26 15:00:38

Se777eN, I didnt think it anywhere near as bad as BF: MC as on that if someone just looks in your general direction it stuck a red marker on you but hear you only get a market put on you when someone on your team has actually spotted that person.
Thats why u'll hear things like sniper spotted shouted out in a voice over then see the dot that represents where they are

In reply to

cchance

Commented on 2008-03-26 15:51:35

is this COD4 ( i know its more teamplay oriented which is great! but i mean daymn it looks good ) with vehicles!!!!! THIS ROCKS but does it have flyable jets/helicopters? i saw tanks, howitzers and jeeps... but what else me love massive battles with vehicles, and i dont see why people say its slow they seemed to get that howitzer and tank fireing pretty quick in the video :)

In reply to

cchance

Commented on 2008-03-26 15:53:45

please someone fill me in ...

will BFBC have Split Screen Xbox Live with Guest Support???? PLEASE GOD SAY YES! if so im buying it day 1 along with reupping my year of XBL .... if not im gonna be massively depressed that and vehicles are the 2 things missing from cod4

In reply to

Immortal_Daemon

Commented on 2008-03-26 16:45:19

I got a kick out of the beta (which says demo on the title screen).

A few nitpicks:

1. The destruction is nice, but it glitches occasionally. It's also annoying that you can't destroy internal walls or ceilings (unless you take out an external wall along with them).

2. The guns aren't powerful enough. 10 shots to kill a person is waaaaay to many.

3. Snipers don't have to lead their targets, which is a bit cheap.

And so far...... I haven't found a parachute button. Does this game even have parachutes?

In reply to

Jigen

Commented on 2008-03-26 17:20:08

I was playing some more last night. I like the game even more now.

I'm liking this game at least as much as I ever did BF1942 or BF2 now. Still, I want some notice that the SP side of the game is at least OK, unlike the BF PC games...

As far as parachutes, I can't be certain but I don't think there is any. I almost wonder if they took them out to reduce 'drop in' hits on critical points. What's even more odd is once I was shot down in a heli, and it did that whole spin thing, and just as it landed I was slamming the B button and the heli exploded but I was alive, standing on the ground, completely unhurt. Don't know if that is intentional or not, but I think not.

Also had 2 complete freezes last night, which were annoying. Is there any way to report bugs in this 'beta'?

I like the spotting system (for spotting enemy units). I can't remember what BF2 did, did it do the same thing? I haven't played that game for like a year or more.

Now that I'm used to the vehicle controls, I think the vehicle combat is just great in this one. I do feel the ground units are sometimes underpowered. It seemed like it took ~9 rockets to take down a single tank once (me and other teammates were in a building, I used my full load of rockets, and others were shooting too). I know usually the rear of tanks are more vulnerable, but 9 rockets, even to the front is too many. It should be ~2 to the back ~4 to the front.

The thing with being 'safe' in BF2, you COULD be really safe a lot of places. Because your building cover can be blown away from you in this one, I think that's a big thing. You can't just hole up in an invincible building against enemy fire.

In reply to

I was playing some more last night.  I like the game even more now.

I'm liking this game at least as much as I ever did BF1942 or BF2 now.  Still, I want some notice that the SP side of the game is at least OK, unlike the BF PC games...

As far as parachutes, I can't be certain but I don't think there is any.  I almost wonder if they took them out to reduce 'drop in' hits on critical points.  What's even more odd is once I was shot down in a heli, and it did that whole spin thing, and just as it landed I was slamming the B button and the heli exploded but I was alive, standing on the ground, completely unhurt.  Don't know if that is intentional or not, but I think not.

Also had 2 complete freezes last night, which were annoying.  Is there any way to report bugs in this 'beta'?

I like the spotting system (for spotting enemy units).  I can't remember what BF2 did, did it do the same thing?  I haven't played that game for like a year or more.

Now that I'm used to the vehicle controls, I think the vehicle combat is just great in this one.  I do feel the ground units are sometimes underpowered.  It seemed like it took ~9 rockets to take down a single tank once (me and other teammates were in a building, I used my full load of rockets, and others were shooting too).  I know usually the rear of tanks are more vulnerable, but 9 rockets, even to the front is too many.  It should be ~2 to the back ~4 to the front.

The thing with being 'safe' in BF2, you COULD be really safe a lot of places.  Because your building cover can be blown away from you in this one, I think that's a big thing.  You can't just hole up in an invincible building against enemy fire.

Battlefield BC: The beta is up

Beta: Attract mode

Beta gameplay #1

All comments (57)

Assassin's Creed Black Flag Resynced

STAR WARS: Galactic Racer

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4

Xbox Games Showcase + Gears of War E-Day Direct

Future Games Show: Summer Showcase 2026

Summer Game Fest 2026