chautemoc: Well, if you want to measure in "Call of Duty terms", then pretty much everything that isn't Call of Duty is a failure.
Lemmings don't know or care about company ethics or practices.
Anyway, great work will always remain outside of majority appreciation...it's just how things are balanced...or imbalanced some might say.
On the bright side, under the current circumstances, this means less stupid Call of Duty fans in the Battlefield community (not that there aren't a large number of stupid Battlefield fans).
This.
anjohl: The public really should be ashamed of themselves for not supporting Bad COmpany. Hnads down the only "serious" shooter worth playing. Total game changer, with the destrutible terrain, as it brings the terrain into the game, unlike every other FPS, where the players are like ghosts, only affecting each other.
Of course, the Call of Duty zombies won't care about any of this, so it doesn't matter. $20 bargain bin 2 months after launch, guarenteed.
Indeed, the first Bad Company should have been much more well received than it actually was IMO.
It's not BF3 of course, but as you said BFBC was innovative at the consoles with the destructive envinroments and sound, also had fun characters/campaign. Sadly, it was not on PC.
I disagree it will hit $20 soon, though. It will stay $40 to $60 for a long time, it's EA, just like EA's Medal of Honor 2010 still is $39.99.
Thinking about this, now it could be the perfect chance to re-release all the series digitally (except for BF2 which already is of course(. They would get a good money out of it, still it's bad publicity since the lemmings who may buy it will say "oh the graphics suck and it doesn't play like mah CoD", then they probably won't buy BF3.
This could have happened to build up hype for the 2010's MoH, but EA didn't do it... didn't embraced the opportunity to re-release all MoH titles.
Kurina: I want to get excited about BF3, I really do, but I am also very apprehensive until they give out more information. It's great they are bringing back some of the primary features of the older titles, but there is also a great deal still left to be answered before I can get hyped up about it.
Although unrelated to Battlefield, my lowest point was when I was given a copy of MoH. Whether single or multi, I couldn't play it longer than a day. It is seriously depressing what modern shooters have turned into. I really hope BF3 will restore some sanity to this genre, and bring them back to where they once were. Until more information is released though, I'm still being a bit cautious about it.
I'm excited and apprehensive, but apprehensive just until the first gameplay video is out. But with the recent reveal of the PC exclusive features, guess we won't be THAT disappointed, there must be something good out of this commitment of being more hardcore than the previous entry.
It's the same with the great OFP, then ArmA kinda sucked for many people, then came ArmA 2 and lots of people liked it and talked about how it's true to PC gaming. Similarly, BF1942/BF2, then BFBC2 kinda sucked for many on PC, then now it's BF3 time to show up. ;)
And thank you for the scans links, and thanks chautemoc for linking the whole lot. Will read it all tomorrow.
I'm not surprised in any way that there won't be mod tools, because of two reasons: as complexity goes up, also goes up the number of crappy community-made stuff, that's why id also probably won't release mod tools for Rage (and the same reason people think the Crysis engine can't deliver that much; because they see crappy made mods, and don't see the professional stuff made with it which truly shows off the engine capabilities), and second, Dice/EA won't sell many DLCs if there is free maps and stuff to compete with.
