Zero Punctuation: Battlefield: Bad Company 2

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . . . 16 NEXT
 

Actually enjoyed this review, the shear amount of suck that was this game deserves some ragging on. Especially multiplayer, and the destruction engine was incredibly useless and game breaking at the same time.

Dedicated Servers that work FTMFW!
/sarcasm

Fail marketing by DICE. xD

All his critics are correct on the game, but the game ain't bad, in fact its quite good.

This is one of Yahtzee's "I-hate-this-game-but-you-probably-won't" kind of reviews. yes I categorize his reviews.

on an only slightly related note, Zero Punctuation is the only thing preventing me from COMPLETELY hating Wednesdays.

Da3nd:

ForgottenPr0digy:
I like this review because he mention a panther. And I love panthers

image

Cute panther kittens FTW

WIN!!!

well thank you

Yathzee hates online shooter games

ForgottenPr0digy:

Da3nd:

ForgottenPr0digy:
I like this review because he mention a panther. And I love panthers

image

Cute panther kittens FTW

WIN!!!

well thank you

Yathzee hates online shooter games

oh, speaking of which, For the love of god guys, Yahtzee HATES, I repeat, HATES ALL ONLINE in video games (the exception being Team Fortress 2). So lay off guys.

Xanthon:
While I think Yahtzee's great, I really had to make an account to respond to this one. This review was a big waste for me. I don't have a problem with the fact that Yahtzee refuses to review a game's multiplayer aspect, but then why even bother to review games where the singleplayer is an afterthought and 90% of the playerbase bought it for the multiplayer. Frankly I was surprised this game had any single player at all as the last BF game I played (2142) had no single player campaign at all. The only reason I even played the campaign at all was to get acquainted with the game before throwing myself into multiplayer (not to mention the servers were a mess on opening day). I was so disinterested in a BF singleplayer component that I skipped through every cutscene and I NEVER do that.

Another thing that's annoying me is the "this is just a MW2 ripoff, although I haven't played the multiplayer or even the game itself, so really I have no clue" mentality. If you played the multiplayer at all you'd see how vastly different the game is. If you want to criticize certain aspects of the game, be my guest, but at least be informed about it.

I agree with everything you say here. I like Yahtzee, but this review was a waste.

Welcome to the Escapist by the way.

Technically MW copied BF2 from the PC (as well as the google map loading screens), but it was BF2 in close quarters. Although they added elements of there own of course, but....... It created a bias hardcore fan base (like every next gen with advertising nostalgia). MW indeed copied from battlefield first, so DICE decided to make $**t hit the proverbial fan by pissing on Infinity Ward's building but with RPGs and air strikes. Did anyone else notice the fact DICE was slamming MW in any way. like the new F.R.A.G.S PSA. Anyways my point is Call of duty MW 1 and 2 would actually be running around saying Battlefield (with actual story) Repeat 3 times. They both copy just MW made a foundation of what made BF2 work, while Battlefield (already established in Modern warfare games) picked at some of the features MW had. I am also in denial that the real MW2 will come out soon and this side story was just expensive DLC. Just like transformers 1 and transformers 1/2 not 2. Mr. Bay was clever.

the dust was seriously ridiculous. got discouraged to continue playing because i couldnt see through it and the russians could see me perfectly fine. and whats the point of having the silenced SCAR when they can hear you anyways -__-

Not G. Ivingname:
This is another case of a game made around multiplayer with the single player tacked on the last minute. The entire battlefield series up to the original bad company was entirely about multiplayer and DICE still has not gotten the single player right.

Also, just about everything this game does/doesn't do is because MW2 did/didn't do it. Think about it, what has the game done that either is straight off a rip off to Modern Warfare 2 or highly hyped because it isn't doing it? They stuffed the fact that PC's have dedicated servers and that the game is "single play focused" (which it isn't really) while forgetting to mention the story, pacing and even a good deal of the locations are in the realm of "Painting a stolen car to sell it back to the owner."

Ima go ahead and guess you've never played it as your argument is "ITS IN MODERN TIMES, WHAT A RIP OFF!!!! THEY PUT DEDICATED SERVERS!!!! THOSE IW 1UPPING BASTARDS!!!" Thank you for your time.

F8L Fool:

Silk_Sk:
Yahtzee should really stop reviewing games that everyone buys for the multiplayer.

Agreed. I have watched every one of his reviews on this site, and the ones I enjoyed the absolute least were the games that are either successful thanks to their multiplayer components (Halo, Gears of War, Call of Duty, Bad Company, etc.), or have a terrible one that would be amusing to rip to shreds.

The sad thing is Croshaw thinks that multiplayer is useless. My bad, let me use an exact quote rather than speculate: "Unfortunately I don't give a flying sh*t about multiplayer, and neither do a lot of people." (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/8-Halo-3)

That mentality really carries over to every single game he reviews. I hate to burst your bubble Croshaw, but millions of people care about multiplayer. Hence why the games built around it absolutely demolish the games that lack it in terms of sales and popularity. So by you not actually giving an accurate (or any) account of a games multiplayer, you're successfully excluding an enormous portion of the market.

I just don't get how a reviewer in this day and age could not touch on multiplayer in a game. You wouldn't go to a movie blindfolded and complain about the lack of visiuals, just like you shouldn't play a game without touching on the multiplayer and whining about the lack of complexity, depth, replayability, quality, or whatever redeeming quality that multiplayer typically serves as in this day and age.

"depth"? A very few multiplayer modes have a story, and with out a story, a game doesn't add depth to the game for me. For me multiplayer is just a little bonus that i can use if i get bored.

addeB:
"depth"? A very few multiplayer modes have a story, and with out a story, a game doesn't add depth to the game for me. For me multiplayer is just a little bonus that i can use if i get bored.

See for me I don't purchase a game unless it has stellar multiplayer. The reason being that a game without it just lacks the replayability that I am looking for. The gameplay is what matters most to me in a shooter, sports, and fighter. I play RPG's and Adventure games for story first, and gameplay mechanics second. I play MMO's for gameplay and social aspects, and not the story in any way. I could give a damn what the lore behind a dungeon I'm exploring has, or a boss I'm killing.

If a game doesn't have multiplayer it must have at least 80-100 hours of single player content for me to even think of purchasing it. Because frankly 80-100 hours is nothing compared to the 500+ hours I could easily invest in an amazing shooter.

The reason that shooters sell so well is because of the multiplayer experience, and not the story. It's not a coincidence that MW2 sold so damn well. It's not because it had some unbelievable single player campaign. It's because dozens of millions of people are addicts for the MP, just like they are for Halo, Gears of War, Counter Strike, Unreal, Quake, and all those other shooters that are MULTIPLAYER DRIVEN GAMES.

If the aforementioned games didn't have MP, guaranteed they wouldn't have sold even half as well. Maybe not even a quarter as well.

"OK with Russian Rule"? Well, I guess it is all either pink or red to you foreigners anyway.

(yes, I'm aware your hero was joking)

notyouraveragejoe:

Abedeus:

notyouraveragejoe:
Pretty good job and I thought it seemed very Modern Warfare 2 ish. I haven't played the game but I doubt I'll get it (I still enjoy my MW2).

So... why did you think it was like MW2? From his "review"? Single-player, they look similar, but again are different. Multiplayer? No, totally different.

Not from his review but just the general feel. I do mean Single-Player since I haven't really seen much from the Multi-player at all to be honest. And that would be why I said I thought it seemed rather then just it seemed. Plus I do agree that I shouldn't really be making statements on a game I haven't played I just thought I'd throw in my two cents. Is the multi-player better in MW2 or Bad Company dya think?

Honestly? BC is better. Maybe because it's not an arcade shooter like MW2, where people throw frags left and right and impersonate Rambo and his tactics.

Also because vehicle combat is freaking awesome, I love it even when a tank blows up the building I was trying to hide in.

Oh Yatzhee, if you'd hated these games from the start instead of enjoying MW (like, FOOLS), your words would sting the public more.

My response to "realistic" (non-stealth) shooters:

1. Games aren't really supposed to be realistic. IT'S WHY YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.

2. Having incredibly low health in a non-stealth game that is supposedly all about multiplayer just encourages too much cheap tactics and people working their level best to find game breakers, of which there are usually many, becausethedevelopersdon'tcareaboutbalanceImeandoubleshotguns,really-(long, increasingly unhinged tirade)

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

Just adding that COD: MW/MW2 are the bastard childes of BF2 (The multiplayer part of them CODs). This means that BC/BC2 is the "at least I have the mother daddy married-brother" of COD: MW/MW2. Which makes it a lot better.

Bek359:
My response to "realistic" (non-stealth) shooters:

1. Games aren't really supposed to be realistic. IT'S WHY YOU'RE PLAYING A GAME.

3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

You should try Vietcong, Crysis, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 1 and 2, BF2, TF Classic, TF2 and something like those.

I generally enjoy Zero Punctuation, but there is just something about reviewing the single player of a multiplayer game and accusing it of being similar to MW2 when it blatantly admits that the single player campaign is meant to be mocking MW2... I just felt like "wow, yahtzee is an observant one, isn't he... *rolls eyes*".

Poomanchu745:
Not very funny although I did hate the mortar scene. Staying on the guys ass and still dying was pretty damn frustrating.

Am I the only person who made it through the mortar scene in one go? When it ended I actually figured the explosions were there more for effect then to outright kill you and didn't even pay them any real mind. Am I amazing or just lucky?

Not G. Ivingname:
Also, just about everything this game does/doesn't do is because MW2 did/didn't do it. Think about it, what has the game done that either is straight off a rip off to Modern Warfare 2 or highly hyped because it isn't doing it? They stuffed the fact that PC's have dedicated servers and that the game is "single play focused" (which it isn't really) while forgetting to mention the story, pacing and even a good deal of the locations are in the realm of "Painting a stolen car to sell it back to the owner."

Is this person aware that Battlefield came first, and most of the things he likes about MW2 were taken and then refined from the Battlefield formula?

okay wow I am having so much fun with this game's campaign (eh, had some fun times sniping in the multiplayer but it's a rental so I won't have much time to invest in it)
maybe the friendly mortar part will cause me a lotta pain but we'll see lol
I will say tho, the enemies are rather quick at spotting you and able to hit you with iron sighted machine guns from sniper rifle (or DRM whatever) distance...and ya lotsa dust

Bek359:
3. All the brown, utterly soulless levels/maps, I have no interest in. Let's see a shooter where you fight in the jungle or on the coastline (AND NOT D-DAY! THERE ARE ENOUGH WWII SHOOTERS ALREADY!) or somewhere colorful and different, for a change.

I guess you should try out Bad Company 2 then. As like, half the game takes place in jungle and/or coastline.

He should just really stop reviewing games that the strong point is multiplayer, and when everyone asks him why he didn't review a game, he can just say "It's a multiplayer game and I can't be bothered to play it" since he really doesn't like it.

Because honestly IMO the multiplayer (especially Rush mode) in this game pretty much destroys Modern Warfare 2 but you wouldn't know that from this review.

I have been saying it a lot in recent comments; ZP isn't as good as it used to be.
But this week it was pretty good. Still not as good as the old days. *daydreams of nostalgia*

I agree; the single player game was shit, besides being absolutely gorgeous in a few parts. The single player campaign, however, was literally just a prologue for the multi-player.

Seriously...no, seriously it's just a long tutorial and exposition for the multi-player.

At the end of the single player campaign your boss says, "Good job, and by the way the Russians are invading Alaska!"

It's no coincidence that three of the multi-player maps are set in Alaska.

Good thing the multiplayer is great... the singpleplayer was purely intented to get trough the boredom when the servers are down... :-(

I actually enjoyed the game. The campaign was too linear, helicopter combat was unsatisfying. I actually enjoyed the dust thing. Squinting your eyes and firing randomly at bad guys while dragging your ass from cover to cover was quite entertaining for me. It gave more of a challenge and dimension.
The sound effects were great, and the gfx engine ran smooth throughout the game. Also, your allies aren't totally useless like in CoD, even if that breaks the immersion by turning them into bulletproof mutated supersoldiers.
Hated the helicopter scenes.. don't understand why Stinger missiles aren't hanging around. Building models were limited, and a Siberian hut would end up looking like Tarzan's mansion in the middle of the jungle.
The first mission was okay, sending you back to ww2 for plot insulation duty.
Hated the frequent, uncontrollable cutscenes. Maybe the devs were too afraid you'd look in the wrong direction and miss the action. Maybe they should try to learn a thing or two from HL2's dev commentaries. Yes i was boring enough to play through the games for the fifth time, while also listening to them.

Sorry but I did a double take at "realistic shooter". BC2 is not exactly realistic, ArmA2 with ACE mod or [for a much better example] DCS Black Shark is realistic, BC2 is just particle effects, shiny graphics and more explosions than probably ever occured in the last 10 years, having said that I wish my copy would hurry up, ETA the 24th, humph! :D

- Just a correction there, hospitals, crawling to safety, border patrol and pushups would be "authenticity" more than "realism". In terms of realism it's pretty far off (everyone carries parachutes, regenerating health, no armor simulation etc, I think "Military Action Shooty Shooty Fun Game" is a more accurate description =P

Edit: "Game" doesn't mean it can't be realistic, some people like realistic games, just like some people like games with bright colours and shiny things.

Blowing up buildings makes dust. Lots of it. Or has everybody conveniently forgotten the enormous dust clouds from the Twin Towers ? It's just what happens when you start hitting bricks and mortar with heavy munitions and explosives.

And yes, Yahtzee is a bad influence on his friends, but who isn't ?

Perhaps it's that I'm drunk but this was one of the funniest episodes in a fucking long while.

I do agree with the excess of "realistic" shooters being ridiculous, and I always point out to my friends that "realistic" is not fucking realistic it's just a different type of shittier shit.

Not a mention to the multiplayer... But it's understandable why Yahtzee doesn't have any friends, I would hate to play something with him :P

I was laughing my ass off on the part with the Duke Nukem and restart button + The fist pounding on him constantly.

Infernal_Me:

Mromson:

Infernal_Me:
Single player was cool but the MP was god awful.
Anyone else see the irony of the AD for BFBF2 overlaying the video while watching him rip into it?

Did you play the Console version of BFBC2 MP or something?

YEs I played the Console version. I loved Battlefield 1943, I enjoyed BC one but the MP in this game was garbage at best. In game you have no sense of surroundings, The grainy effect they washed the game with really does a disservice to the graphics and your ability to see crap. The leveling system is awful and the "Perk" system was uninspired. The loading just to play a mp game took longer than it needed to be and the navigation through screens was ricockulous.

I've been playing the game in MP for more than 90 hours now and I never had ANY issues knowing where I am and where stuff is. The graphics are awesome and I have no idea what grainy effects you're referring to. No idea how the "console" loading times are - but for me, the loading is next to instant.

Swing and a miss Yahtzee, swing and miss...

Yes, BC2's single player is shamelessly "borrowing" the setting, to put it gently, from MW (the original, not the shitty sloppy seconds). No, he gameplay is totally different. Yes, the single player totally needs work (although I'd argue you were just playing it wrong, considering I didn't have much of an issue in the mortar stage... Run).

With all those faults, it still offers the best experience I've ever had in a game. A great part of it is the MP, and we all know you don't review that, but considering the MP was largely the focus (and the SP was more of a secondary "bonus" experiment) you really should have given it a try... Then again you reviewed Borderlands as a single player game, which equally confused me (despite the fact that I don't particularly like it).

I hope I meet Yahtzee in a shooter some day because I'll probably shoot his nuts off more often than he swears. :D

The BFBC2 singleplayer campaign was in my not so humble opinion disappointingly easy (even on the highest difficulty setting) and "criminally short" as Yahtzee would have put it. It's as close to a rail-shooter as you can get without disabling WASD. Yeah, some sequences I had to do over and over, like that damned cockpit rush, but in the end I probably spent less than 10 hours on it.

Then again... DICE probably learned from Portal there: don't drag it out because people won't thank you for it. Do your things once and then move the heck on. Had I had to endure another "Run or die from hypothermia (you underdressed tosser)" sequence I would have been quite dishertened. It doesn't lend itself well to dwelling on. Just do it once for giggles.

I think the single player mode should best be regarded as a fun little novella that comes with the game (like The Dark Wheel to Elite) that also doubles as a tutorial for the real part of BFBC2: the multiplayer mode.

/S

8bitmaster:
gotta hate realism shooters. its just too accurate to life. Give me halflife 2 any day.

I wouldn't call Modern Warfare 2 or Bad Company 2 that realistic. A realistic war shooter would be Operation Flashpoint. When you get shot in the legs you pretty much lose the ability to use them after a bullet or two.

You can even bleed to death in the game as well.

hcig:

Anti Nudist Cupcake:
Didn't really tell me much about the game. Is it me or is he becoming increasingly harder to understand? Its like he talks faster after each review, if you could call it a review and not some series of puns that was meant to entertain people.

the funny thing is, last week everyone was complaining he was talking slower

WUUUUT?? lol. That's crazy talk, he never talks slow.

 Pages PREV 1 . . . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 . . . 16 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here