The real BF experience

BFBC2 is basically my first battlefield game aside from 5 minutes of a match on BC1 and in my time on these forums I keep reading that BC isn't the real Battlefield it's more of a spinoff. So to all the actual BF vets what is the difference between bad company and other BF games??(aside from obvious things that go with new games like graphics and such)

 

Discussion Info


Last updated July 3, 2018 Views 0 Applies to:

The Battlefield experience is about the maps.  Large or small, the great maps were balanced, had multiple vehicles(including choppers), multiple(interesting) flag locations, etc...They were maps designed to be Conquest maps.  They were not  Rush maps that were converted to be Conquest maps. 

no squads either... spawn back at base or on a captured flag. made the flags more important to control.

Basically Assyrian hit it on the nail, the true battlefields had 6-7 set classes and didn't combine *** like in Bad Company, bigger maps, more vehicles per map, more flags per map and the ammo/health boxes don't look like huge lunch boxes. Only thing BC2 had on the older games was more unlockables and destruction

Bigger maps, more players, more flags, no Rush.

Generally more vehicles and classes as well.

If you want to you can give some of the older PC BF games a try, some of them are really cheap. I recently rebought 1942 and all of it's expansions for 1€, still the best BF in my opinion. You can play against bots in all those older ones so if you're not used to mouse/keyboard then no big deal.

If you don't want to do that try BF2:MC or BF1943 on the xbox, those are the closest examples you will get on console.

According to DICE BF3 will be more like these games and less like the BC series. Although 4 classes and Rush will be included.