Mmm... tanky.
ack in November, Modern Warfare 2 sold more copies on its opening weekend than any game in history. Left 4 Dead 2 arrived a week later, and in January, PS3 owners got MAG. And let’s not forget Halo 3: ODST, which preceded them all by several weeks.
That’s four top-flight shooters, more or less all at once, one of which now boasts 25 million unique online players. In other words, gamers have eaten a lot of lead this winter.
But spring is fast approaching, the days here in Vancouver are growing less grey and depressing, the city still seems to show signs of its Olympic high, and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (EA, DICE, Mar. 2, PS3, 360 and PC) has thrown down the gauntlet (or anti-tank mine, maybe) and wants to compete for our shooter dollars and hours. All of this serves to cheer my ass up in a big way.
Now, if you’re a shooter freak, you probably already have a clear sense of what you like, and don’t need to be told what’s what. You may even own all four games already. Furthermore, FPS love is often about gaming with others, so your preferred game may simply be the one your friends are playing. In other words, it’s probable that your standard ‘side-by-side-by-side’ comparison article won’t sway you, or even help you much.
So instead of doing that, I’m just going to talk about my experience. I was pretty into Modern Warfare 2 for a while there, but Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (and not MW2) will be my go-to multiplayer shooter in 2010. Here’s why:
Is there anything more satisfying in life than shooting a camper in the ear with a shotgun?
BC2 mastery requires the total package: good shooting, planning, sneaking, and thinking, and Modern Warfare 2 rewards the quickdraw: those with raw reflexes, and those with better ping. Period. And I much prefer (and do much better in) games that reward the former.
Yes, there are windows to shoot from, static obstacles to run around, and some basic fake-’em-out and stealth action in MW2, but most of the map designs promote everyone being funneled down one or two main corridors, resulting in lots of twitchy, head-on firefights where tactics don’t help much, and there are few opportunities to outthink your enemy; the dude who starts shooting straight first wins.
The fact MW2 maps are tight and fast also means lots of dances—scenarios where 2 players more or less bump into each other, spotting each other at the same time—where the quicker draw or faster connection gets the kill.
BC2 has vehicles, and they aren’t gimmicky! They’re a ton of fun to drive. Tear around the perimeter of the map on a quad bike to flank, or crash an enemy stronghold with a tank, feeling the ground shake as you unleash hell with missles and a chain gun. I dare you not to smile while doing it.
In BC2 there’s lots of space. Maps are really big (making those speedy quad bikes even more appealing) and because of how things are laid out, flanking is always a viable strategy. In Modern Warfare 2, ‘flanking’ usually means retreating, because you have to leg it a LONG way to get behind the guy, and usually have to run a set route, so you’re unlikely to get there without running into combat somewhere else.
Similarly, there’s time to stop and think (and plan) in BC2. You can stop and heal your squad, repair your tanks if need be, and decide from which direction to approach the next target.
Stop and breathe... but stay here for too long and your ass WILL hurt.
Virtually every hiding spot and perch is vulnerable to attack from behind or the side… making camping a losing strategy for all but the best snipers (who would probably kill you regardless). There’s nowhere you can stand still in BC2 without leaving stalkers and flankers a way to kill you.
Many times in the first couple of nights playing, I chased someone into a building, but then turned on a dime, ducked around the side, and shot them in the side of the head through a window, while they were watching the door. Now THAT is satisfying, much more so than just being the guy who got to the trigger first. And that’s the result of good map design.
The environments in BC2 are destructible, which means you can knock down walls and fences (creating new pathways and destroying your enemy’s cover) and—get this—collapse buildings full of snipers!
Similarly, if you know someone is out of ammo and cowering in a house with his sidearm trained on the door, you don’t need to poke your head in there and get it blown off; you can just blast holes in the wall of the house.
I’m pretty sure blowing stuff up is a base pleasure for most of us, and the thrill of wrecking things is greatly enhanced by sound design and graphical flourishes which are better than I’ve ever seen. Even when you aren’t killing anything, it’s pretty satisfying to shoot an RPG at a window and hear that deep thump and see the window get twice as big, bricks and dust flying everywhere.
A MW2 match is over in ten minutes or less. BC2 games are generally twice that long, giving you time to observe opponents and start predicting which window they’ll try to shoot you from.
Destruction 2.0. Yes, they actually call it that.
The spawn ticket system: In Rush and Conquest game modes, when you run out of tickets you lose; game over. Ticket depletion is linked to how well you capture and hold objectives, but also, every time you spawn, you lose a ticket. BUT if a medic revives you, your team doesn’t lose a ticket. Thus, medics actually directly help your team win. In MW2, medics don… oh right, MW2 doesn’t have medics; everyone is just a killing machine.
And, despite being bigger and slower, BC2 gunplay is more chaotic, frenzied and somehow more exciting than in MW2. I’m not the only one who thinks so; I did some informal research in some gaming forums and a player named Machine74 hit the nail on the head, as far as I’m concerned:
When it all comes together, BFBC2 creates that firefight that I like. And watching buildings come apart as the battle progresses is too freaking cool. I thought MAG had some great maps, but BFBC2′s maps are even better and more beautiful (but that is not a surprise). And let me say this…The firefight is what i like about shooters. Unloading copious amounts of ammo, is what’s fun to me. Bullets flying all around and tearing everything up; those are the fun games. That’s why I play.
And he added that BC2′s assault class has the ability to drop ammo for his squad mates, providing still more incentive to run with a squad and do things cooperatively.
There are no killstreak rewards in BC2, which, after a bunch of MW2, I missed at first. But in time I realized that with no one getting “rewarded” with 5 or 10 free kills, victories weren’t continually going to the team with one hot player.
And finally, nobody has screamed obscenities at me in a screechy prepubescent voice, in three full nights of BC2.
I liked MAG in principle (tactical, big maps, varied multi-step objectives, classes, leadership roles) but it didn’t grab me; I found it visually bland, and too few people properly utilized leadership roles and squad tactics. The run-and-gun fun of Modern Warfare was more casual and more accessible, and for a lot of reasons (including 60fps, the callsigns, the ACR, and a shortage of friends with MAG) I went back to MW2 after only a week or less. But after acclimatizing to Battlefield: Bad Company 2, unless future expansions swing things back in someone else’s favor, I doubt I’ll be going back to either. I freaking love this game.
Great site. A lot of useful information here. I’m sending it to some friends!
thanks for that
i’m with infelic. The game is great. Something about MW2 just feels cheap to me. Don’t get me wrong, it’s fun…but BC2 is just a different beast. I feel like spending 2 seconds to think out my next move has an effect in this game.
Completely agree with this review.
As apposed to being locked in a specified map area and constantly respawing and having 1v1 fights instead you are having massive WARS.
I enjoy BC2 for the shear fact that instead of just running and gunning down a hallway, i can:
1. Run and gun.
2. Break down a wall
3. Go outside and blow up his wall.
4. Collapse the Building.
And thats if im NOT in a tank
Completely agree with this review.
As apposed to being locked in a specified map area and constantly respawing and having 1v1 fights instead you are having massive WARS.
I enjoy BC2 for the shear fact that instead of just running and gunning down a hallway, i can:
1. Run and gun.
2. Break down a wall
3. Go outside and blow up his wall.
4. Collapse the Building.
And thats if im NOT in a tank
thanks for that
play the game bro.. it’s freaking awesome. You’ll run into plenty of enemies, tanks, helos and other badassery.
You somehow picked points that were actually positives in the article and tried using them as negative aspects of the game. Just because BC2 isn’t a twitch shooter does not mean you don’t need quick reflexes. It is an FPS afterall, so obviously being slow is a great disadvantage.
And in BC2 you have time to plan because the maps are large enough to have areas of safety that allow you to think of your next move. You can actually determine when you want to get back into the action, and when you do it is far more hectic and chaotic than MW2. BC2 is in no way slow paced and dull. MW2 has small, corridor funneled layouts that make thinking unnecessary.
And in BC2 the maps are big, but how the hell did you assume that you don’t see enemies often? You know where the action is at all times so you know exactly where to be if you want to see enemies. Obviously if you sit in your spawn the entire round you won’t see any enemies, but unless you are some sort of idiot, that shouldn’t happen.
Reading you comments it is clear you are assuming and hearing whatever you want to hear, and it seems like you are being an offended MW2 fan.
i’m with infelic. The game is great. Something about MW2 just feels cheap to me. Don’t get me wrong, it’s fun…but BC2 is just a different beast. I feel like spending 2 seconds to think out my next move has an effect in this game.
Well written article.
I enjoy both games alot, but i think that bad company 2 is something fresh to me compared to the halo and cod series.
If you enjoy mw2 you are likely to enjoy bc2 but again they are very much different.
bc2 involves killing and objectives but players can also play support roles, such as playing a medic (equipped with a gun) to support and revive players or you can fly your squad in a chopper to the the objective with a gunner out the side covering you as you drop teammates off to plant a bomb.
thanks for that
Completely agree with this review.
As apposed to being locked in a specified map area and constantly respawing and having 1v1 fights instead you are having massive WARS.
I enjoy BC2 for the shear fact that instead of just running and gunning down a hallway, i can:
1. Run and gun.
2. Break down a wall
3. Go outside and blow up his wall.
4. Collapse the Building.
And thats if im NOT in a tank
Here’s what I got from the article:
-BC2 is much slower than MW2
-BC2 does not require quick reflexes in order to play well, but in MW2 you need quick reflexes
-in BC2 you have time to stop and plan a strategy, but in MW2 you have to make split second decisions on your plan because there is too much action
-in BC2 the maps are really big so you don’t run into enemies too often, but in MW2 you see enemies often and have to kill them.
Personally, I think these qualities are absolutely horrible for an online FPS, but they might be good in a RTS or a MMORPG
play the game bro.. it's freaking awesome. You'll run into plenty of enemies, tanks, helos and other badassery.
i'm with infelic. The game is great. Something about MW2 just feels cheap to me. Don't get me wrong, it's fun…but BC2 is just a different beast. I feel like spending 2 seconds to think out my next move has an effect in this game.
You somehow picked points that were actually positives in the article and tried using them as negative aspects of the game. Just because BC2 isn't a twitch shooter does not mean you don't need quick reflexes. It is an FPS afterall, so obviously being slow is a great disadvantage.
And in BC2 you have time to plan because the maps are large enough to have areas of safety that allow you to think of your next move. You can actually determine when you want to get back into the action, and when you do it is far more hectic and chaotic than MW2. BC2 is in no way slow paced and dull. MW2 has small, corridor funneled layouts that make thinking unnecessary.
And in BC2 the maps are big, but how the hell did you assume that you don't see enemies often? You know where the action is at all times so you know exactly where to be if you want to see enemies. Obviously if you sit in your spawn the entire round you won't see any enemies, but unless you are some sort of idiot, that shouldn't happen.
Reading you comments it is clear you are assuming and hearing whatever you want to hear, and it seems like you are being an offended MW2 fan.
I don’t see how allowing users to sit and hide safely whenever they want makes for a good FPS attribute, but maybe it is great. There are sometimes in MW2 where I just want to sit and watch the map to make my next move, but you will likely just get killed that way. I have since learned to be aware of where people are at at all times so I can make decisions while still in combat. Perhaps my practice with this skill is why I don’t like the whole “have areas of safety that allow you to think of your next move” feature.
I assumed you didn’t see enemies too often because the author said that the maps of MW2 make for “a lot of dances”. From this statement I assumed that he was implying that in BC2 there “aren’t a lot of dances” Why else would he mention that about MW2?
It seems as if you wanted a big map where you can strategize about your plan and coordinate an attack with lots of teams, then RTS would be a more appropriate category for you.
Also, the one thing that I thought might be good about BC2 wasn’t mentioned in the article, which is the use of teamwork to achieve your objective, but now it seems that it wasn’t as great as people put it to be. I heard a team is made up of squads, and that squads can only communicate to their squadmates and not other squads. IS this true.
Anyways, I will still probably try this game. At the very least it seems really well mad, but I’m more of an FPS fan…
Just play the demo and find out jesus this is all semantics until you actually play.
I have to say the little things in BFBC2 are what sell me on it so much. The sound of a sniper round cracking in the distance, then hitting the leaf of a bush you were just crouch in gets my adrenaline pumping every time. The sounds of a Bradley firing off rounds into a house half a football field away is just too good to explain. I'm a sucker for great audio, and the team at DICE did an awesome job with it.
[...] The Side Mission – A gamers mag | Bad Company 2: all good Company Secretary CourseCompany Secretary Course, Company Secretary ResultsThe secret of successful company blogging « BoagworldPhiladelphia's role in Hollywood film company IPO | Philly | 03/09 …Ms. Yingling Reads: The TBR Pile Grows!HeroPress: Top Of The Pile: Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 8 …RELENTLESS LIBERAL: Military Influence in the USThe External Factors, Which Influence On Trade In Forex. | How to …OKC Looking Into Grand Prix Race – Oklahoma City News Story – KOCO …Battlefield: Bad Company 2 | Gear Patrol View the Contact Powered by Video [...]
-So instead of doing that, I’m just going to talk about why Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (and not Modern Warfare 2) is going to be my go-to multiplayer shooter in 2010:
You should have stuck to your intent, not talking about MW2 at all, instead of doing comparisons of each. Just a basic tenement of writing.
wally, maybe I'll re-write the statement intent, then. I did intend to compare contrast.. I just didn't want to write another checklisty graphics/sound/weapons/matchmaking comparo.
“BC2 mastery requires the total package: good shooting, planning, sneaking, and thinking, and Modern Warfare 2 rewards the quickdraw: those with raw reflexes, and those with better ping. Period. And I much prefer (and do much better in) games that reward the former.”
Period? Ha! It’s quite the opposite. Modern Warfare 2 is a lot like Chess in that if a piece was taken from you, there were obvious a series of moves that lead up to the lost battle. As far as pregame strategy goes you have to master each kind of weaponry and choose the best combination of pro perks, weapons, and weapon attachments. Most people choose to prestige rather than go for pro perks and attachments so by not prestigeing you are already at a great advantage.
Some people might not be killing you because they are quicker or have a better ping, they could simple using the Sleight of Hand Pro perk which allows them to draw their weapon up more quickly. Different types of guns have different aiming down the sight times which you have to consider if you want to play strategically.
“head-on firefights where tactics don’t help much, and there are few opportunities to outthink your enemy; the dude who starts shooting straight first wins.”
The guy who shoots first has always had the advantage in first person shooters.
If your strategy is to rush straight on and go head to head, and you keep losing….maybe it’s time to switch up the strategy?
Believe it or not there is a lot of strategy to Modern Warfare, but if your like most game journalists you’re going to judge a book by it’s first few pages and then write a review on it based off of the jacket summary.
There are players out there who play well with yellow pings by adapting to their situation, rather than playing the typical victim.
bob, not the case, I played a LOT of MW2 and i'm enjoying BC2 more. I win more firefights in BC2 because I enter the situation differently, there always seems to be more options for entering a situation. Take a map like karachi. lots of corridors. if the guy is at one end of the corridor, your only option is to attack him head on, or go ALLL the way around
and I agree with you about slight of hand, I loved that perk (since my ping is basically always 3 bars and i'm not that quick on the draw anyway). but come on.. down-the-sight times? that's twitch/reflex gaming.
I am in a clan that plays MW2 and i have put in more then 6days of playtime and i cant tell you i am totaly sick of the game because soem days you may be good, some matches you may be good, it all depends on the host and your ping. To many times have i seen on my screen myself shooting a player only to see from his side that i DIDNT even shoot! The game picks for you and how is that fun when your actions dont matter. Perks dont work all the time as i have had commando and went to knife sombody and it complete ignores the attack even who its meant to block the enemy player when iam in range for the stab.
Simpel fact is the way IW have handeled the latency and situtations is totaly unfair and makes your effort ignorable due ot the fatc your being hosted by a crap host. BC2 on the other hand makes a player require learning and rewards the player for getting himself in a situation thats stronger for his side. blaaa the simpel fact is MW2 dosnt reward a player for having skill rather a better ping.
oops i meant “and i can tell you” and how did my avatar get attached to my comment when i didnt upload one O_O freaakkkyyy!
xxstalker, you must have a Gravatar, a service that gives you a global avatar. Our comment system grabs avatars from there. that or maybe you're registered on IntenseDebate?
Anyway, I obviously agree with you… the killcams looking different than what the player saw at his end, just rubs it in.
[...] from: The Side Mission – A gamers mag | Bad Company 2: all good tags: are-growing, down-the-gauntlet, gauntlet, icsi, india, rmc, snn, the-city, the-days | [...]