Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermyzy
Okay, Battlefield 3 isn't for me. As a casual gamer I enjoy the "arcade" feel of CoD. With Battlefield 3, I realize it's supposed to better simulate an actual battlefield, but I can't stand how I can run around for 5 minutes and not run into anybody and how everytime I respawn, it takes me 1-2 minutes just to get back into the action. I'm not very good to begin with, and I can't see any of the damn enemies before they pick me off. At least in CoD, the enemies are more visible so at least I stand a chance. I do like the fact you can use the vehicles though. I can see why everybody else would like it though, but for a casual gamer, it's not easy to play
|
I used to be a COD fan myself, then started playing BF. I can see the appeal on both sides. COD just seems more lone wolf style. Smaller maps, fast paced and just go Rambo on everyone you can. You're main objective is to kill as many people as you can. Much like a modern day CS. The thing that irked me the most about COD was the stupid nuke. Just seemed stupid. But hey, to each their own.
BF2 was awesome because you had a commander on each side to delegate to the different squads. Commander would control the UAV, Artillery, Supply drops. I was kinda hoping to see that for BF3.
BF3 is not as forgiving as COD. It does seem a little slower paced, and I think that's the point. Lets people think outside of the box, build your own routes, blow up buildings, etc. The point isn't just to kill as many people as you can, it's about collecting points. You can collect points just by capturing flags, repairing vehicles, reviving or refilling ammo for your team. Just gives you more freedom to do whatever. Just takes time to get used to it. It's really not that bad, just need to play with the right people. Also, you need to practice a little. I started the first few levels hating the game because my K/D ratios sucked. Now I'm loving the game. It shouldn't take you 5 mins to see action, spawn on a squad members.