Letting your team get points is not a good reason for a long respawn time.
Over his comrades I said, an average player to a good player would mean that the good player could be dead for a full minute and still have more points by the end of it.
The game literally zooms the camera in and says "Hey. Look. He shot you. Look at him. He's still there. Look. See? He shot you. Zoom in more. See him? Okay, select your class again and see if you can stay alive this time".
Idle time, yes, but it's honestly not that big a deal in the long run, that, and it hardly actually constitutes "rubbing it in your face".
If you died, you died for a reason, seeing the enemies position and actions afterwards could really help you understand what happened and why. In a way, I kind of see it as essential.
Seriously. There is absolutely no point to being allowed to watch the enemy that killed you for 10 agonizingly slow seconds.
Agonizing slow seconds? Do you just sit there and wait? Look at how you died, see how you're going to respond, or minimize the game and replay epic music so you play better.
CoD said "Look, you died. Here's what he had. Or you can just hit [X], it's cool".
Battlefield actually has an enforced cooldown now that I think of it - it eliminates the adrenline rush and lets you cool off to think of your next move instead of gradually allowing speed and momentum take you over.
I wouldn't have such a problem with it if you could skip it, or change a class while you were waiting, or even quit the game, but you can't. You literally do nothing.
Ingame you do nothing. I agree it's a problem but it's a minor one at best, because of what you can do in the meantime that does infact relate to the rest of the game.
Battlefield is just a little bit stuck-up...it's like the game mocks you for dying by making you watch the guy that killed you for a while before you can respawn.
... Well, I guess you
could construe it like that, I just don't see what benefit that would be - more ammunition against the game perhaps?
Having them stripped away when you change nations is just wrong.
Did I say this was a problem, if I didn't then I'll say it now - it is. But a minor one at best.
Fun, no. I don't like the Dragunov, and never had. It's just never been a rifle I liked. Being forced to use it, when there's another one on the other side that I like significantly more, is bull.
Not liking an effective weapon is your problem sir. When I unlock the F2000 which I despised with a passion on BFBC2 I will gladly try it out to test its capabilities.
?? That's four guns you can't use. That's actually kind of a big deal.
Out of nearly 60? It counts for a maximum of 15% of the ingame weapons, the probability of you using them besides at the start is going to make that even smaller.
This is funny if you think about the fact that, in the last few CoD games, you were offered a max of 10 classes, all set exactly how you wanted them pre-game, while in Battlefield you get 4. Sure, they change based on side, but you only get FOUR. If 10 custom classes isn't enough, why the heck are you fine with 4?
I didn't say I was fine with four good sir. ^^
The Class System is quite a problem.
Quite the contrary infact.
I think it's amusing that I went on about how little I enjoyed Battlefield for several well-explained reasons, but when I pointed out something I DID like, you told me I was wrong again.
Wrong? Maybe. Well explained? Definitely. I am not on Battlefields side, these are my opinions and I don't agree with everything Battlefield did.
Such as, I liked the ability to use a knife as a holding weapon instead of instant-drawn, instant-sheath. You said:
Wrong in this case? I don't know exactly, considering we're talking about the Beta which concerns a map where the Knife is naturally unreliable, yes. In the game as a whole? Hopefully not - sorry if I misinterpreted but in my defense you wasn't entirely accurate. ^^
I said I liked the "destructible landscape" and that it had an advantage over CoD. You said:
The part I was replying to in particular was the:
but that didn't make up for the graphics.
(I was talking about the multiplayer, not singleplayer. Not sure why you switched topics).
My point was that aside from vanity and the urgent need to give away your position, the attachments for light and / or lazers bore no proper benefit in those games. Battlefield allows excellent use of them in an effective manner.
Oh, sorry for not agreeing with you ENOUGH.
It had good reason, I mean come on, each "little" addition has a huge effect that you nor me will be able to fully comprehend yet. It's the metagame.
It wasn't necessarily meant to be confrontational, otherwise it would've been more directed towards you ^^
Good grief, man. You have good points and strong opinions but no class.
Not sure what you mean by that, and it's obvious you're pointing out a flaw, but I'mma take it as a complement anyway.
I was mature enough to nail down a few positives about a game I just did not have fun playing.
That I didn't necessarily disagree with.
You disagreed with everything I said,
Here are three things I didn't disagree with:
For a starting one, it changes elements several times, from a park to a city block to underground tunnels and metro stations. It's fun to swap between open combat and close-range locker rooms. So B3B has a good map.
That isn't the ultimate point of the game, you don't seem to realize the true scale of a BF game.
I enjoy that they put in Op Metro because of the transition of combat, but it lacked combined arms warfare and the true BF feel because of that.
For what it was, it was gobsmacking amazing imo.
Classes: Confused. As of now, I can only edit my classes during combat, without leaving the battlefield. Sniper food. Is this going to be the same in the final game? I don't understand why it's set that way, besides that maybe you need a specific gun RIGHT NOW, so change it RIGHT NOW before you- oh, you're dead. 12 seconds on the bench. Between the edit-class-in-combat option and the watch-enemy-for-10-seconds then pick-class-again option, it's like B3 is trying to stop us from playing.
The Class System is quite a problem.
This is again me agreeing with you. Me tackling CoD was not my priority, but the reason I did it was because your agenda seemed to be a CoD vs Battlefield debate.
What I CAN complain about is that when you change sides, you change guns. All of them. Sure, it's more realistic. Russians would shoot Russian-made weapons, US Army would shoot M16s. But there is a distinct difference in the stats of the guns.
When you consider the M16A3 and the AK74M are the only faction based weapons, there isn't a huge problem, especially being the stats are relatively the same as assault rifles anyway.
This wasn't a lack of a disagreement I remembered but hey - it mays well join us. Was the faction specific weapon balance a problem? Yes. Going into the depth of how much of a problem (that you actually didn't clarify) would probably hold differing opinions.
and had a good teamwork element.
Good doesn't cut it. The bonuses for kill assists and suppression assists for example have a huge effect on the metagame. You, like my Scottish friend, judge on what is there, not what it means or its effects.
The bipod - MEH. It's not a huge addition is it? But look at it, it allows territorial control, accuracy at long range (the stabilization for snipers is essential as well) and much more effective suppressive fire. It gives you the option of changing your Foregrip / Heavy Barrel for that ONE accessory and using your perk that would've been Suppression for... I don't know - Ammo?
You was nowhere specific as to the teamwork element, hell, I have no idea of how much of the game you've played. Which is why I didn't make it to be that confrontational. Granted I did say you judge only on what is there, and what is there constitutes a good teamplay element... but the effects of it show so much more. You seemed to put a lot of effort into your post and I wouldn't think you'd slip up so I considered what you saud what you meant.
4 examples of me not directly disagreeing with you.
And again in my defense - you appeared insanely biased with so much of what you mentioned which I might add is not present in your response. O.o
- H
