{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/27/2010 3:27:56 PM
212
A biased IGN Review of BC2...
Ok, I have watched this review many times, from different points of view, and it is hard not to get frustrated. You feel like you want to go and tell Eric or whatever that he is [i]wrong[/i], and needs to view the game objectively, instead of from a MW2 fanboy perspective.
[url=http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/107/1072632p1.html]IGN Bad Company 2 Review[/url]
Once you've watched the video and read the review, how can you not almost laugh at the things he is saying? "Matches ending abruptly when you win..."? What -blam!-ing game doesn't "abruptly end" when you win? That is one of the dumbest things I have ever heard in a review. "DICE seems to have taken a que from MW2 and tried for a large cinematic scope...". WHAT? MW2 has a cinematic feel to it, but nothing about it really feels "large". It always feels like you are being herded through straight paths towards the terrorists, Sgt. Foley shouting "RAMIREZ, CALL IN THE NUKE!" And if the nonstop action "hurts the cinematic feel they are trying to go for", how do you know they are going for a cinematic feel? What if they just want to make the campaign an epic action experience, with a coolish story tied in? Very contradictory IMO...
And then it is the stupid thing, "you are a super rambo soldier who can activate any vehicle". Eric, STOP PLAYING THE SNOWMOBILE SECQUENCE FROM MW2, AND REALIZE THAT HALF OF THIS GAME IS ABOUT VEHICLES! What is DICE supposed to do? Make you go through training every time you spot a new vehicle? Just get your mind around the fact that this game is vehicle oriented, and stop complaining on "how is my soldier supposed to know how to drive all of these things?" And then, the complaining comes to the "shortness" of the campaign. "6 hours" in Eric's personal opinion is much too short, where he, being the MW2 expert he is, could probably blow through the MW2 campaign on normal from 3 1/2 - 4 hours. If you mark off for a "short" campaign, than shouldn't MW2 be hammered by an objective review for it's extremely short campaign? Guess not. He keeps comparing the two, so why does he throw in the "short" blast...
And another thing, campaign really is just an extra part of this game, but what everybody will be doing is the multiplayer. So why spend so much time on the campaign which is somewhat irrelevant to the game, yet so little on the epic multiplayer experience at hand. Also, you [i]know[/i] this guys is a CoD fanatic when he mentions SPECIALIZATIONS as "PERKs". And they work "similar to that of in CoD"? Right, because realistic specializations (i.e. lightweight clothing/grenade vest) work a lot like "OMGZ I CAN RUN 25 MPH AND LUNGE THE LENGHT OF THE FOOTBALL FIELD, AND I TAKE A SPECIAL PILL SO I CAN EAT BULLETS FOR BREAKFAST NAM NAM NAM"
*facepalm*
Now, it is hard to look at this review objectively for me because I am a huge fan of the Battlefield franchise, but it just disappointing me when a site as acclaimed as IGN puts out a review that is simply, biased. And the fact that Bad Company's 2 sound got a 9/10 is just the end of the line. If the fake and computer generated sounds of MW2 gets a 10, and the HDR audio system used by DICE in this game gets a 9, then I don't know what to say to IGN.
/rant
Thoughts?
~RoKKeR~
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] xo u2 rokker ~RoKKeR~[/quote] haha Bad Company 2 fanboy is upset when he realizes that the game isnt going to get good reviews cause the game is, get this, NOT GOOD.[/quote]Seriously, It got a 9/10. Not good enough for you? The matches do end abruptly, at least Mw2 had a countdown timer. In BFBC2, it just ends. There's a lot of stuff I agree with, but some stuff I disagree with too. I don't think it's biased. If anything, you were expecting perfect reviews. Even your coup is about BFBC2. It's an amazing game, but in THEIR opinion it wasn't quite a 10/10. Jeez. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] xo u2 rokker To whoever said "maybe the sound is worse in the campaign" or it "doesn't sound like a real war", GTFO. If you have played the demo, you will know this is the best sounding FPS out there. Period. There is no denying it, and the fact that it got a 9* really pissed a lot of people off.[/quote] It sounds really good to me, but not "OMG THIS IS THE BEST. PERIOD." I'm not an audiophile, but you can't deny MW2 sounded good just because you're obviously biased against it. They sounded equal IMO. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] darthstewieg[quote]The result is a sense of depth that few videogame worlds can offer.[/quote] [quote]It's an action packed, gorgeous, and explosive game[/quote] [quote]Bad Company 2 as an online shooter is flexible and engaging, offering several features that the competition can only dream of. If you're looking for a more strategic and team-based change of pace, look no further. This is the game for you.[/quote] Clearly this guy hates the game and is completely biased. Jeez, what a negative review. [/quote]Exactly. [Edited on 02.27.2010 10:46 AM PST]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] FinalKing23 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DarkGunner93 For people complaining about people complaining about the review. Read posts first. I'm not saying that it's bad cause his opinion is different, but the review is ridiculous. The review states that the game is bad because you can use every gun and vehicle. That the audio is worse than MW2 when it's known for having some of the best audio in any game. If the guy didn't like it as much as CoD and brought up valid reasons then fine, but he didn't.[/quote] He does actually. He doesn't just say "The game is stupid because you can do everything", he says that ability counter-acts any tense scenarios, or any feeling of an "epic" war environment. And you can't say anything about the audio in the campaign. Maybe it loses its effect there, or compared to MW2 it doesn't "sound" like a real war? Sound quality doesn't warrant a good review, the USE of sound does.[/quote] What game that features multiple weapons/vehicles do you have to be taught how to use them? It's not meant to be realistic, it's meant to be fun. So you think MW2 deserved a 10/10 for audio, seriously? It was nothing special, and alright at best.
-
To whoever said "maybe the sound is worse in the campaign" or it "doesn't sound like a real war", GTFO. If you have played the demo, you will know this is the best sounding FPS out there. Period. There is no denying it, and the fact that it got a 9* really pissed a lot of people off.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] FinalKing23 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DarkGunner93 For people complaining about people complaining about the review. Read posts first. I'm not saying that it's bad cause his opinion is different, but the review is ridiculous. The review states that the game is bad because you can use every gun and vehicle. That the audio is worse than MW2 when it's known for having some of the best audio in any game. If the guy didn't like it as much as CoD and brought up valid reasons then fine, but he didn't.[/quote] He does actually. He doesn't just say "The game is stupid because you can do everything", he says that ability counter-acts any tense scenarios, or any feeling of an "epic" war environment. And you can't say anything about the audio in the campaign. Maybe it loses its effect there, or compared to MW2 it doesn't "sound" like a real war? Sound quality doesn't warrant a good review, the USE of sound does.[/quote] Multiplayer is what gives the player an epic war feeling. You often will get that feeling when you're running down the road with a bunch of your squad mates while a friendly convoy rolls past you and helicopters fly overhead while the town you are entering is getting bombed by mortars. The use of sound is way better than most shooters out there including MW2. The sound is what fully immerses you into the game whether the powerful feeling of gunfire, the actual gunfire echoes from other players when you're half way across the map, the echoing sound of gunfire when you fire inside a building, or the brief seconds of deafness when an explosion hits close by, all of which makes you feel like you are actually there.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] sweetgirl12 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Damn you people need to relax. I played BC1 and i can say not much has changed,same old story and some new snow and jungles.[/quote] And you think the story line for CoD4 and MW2 has changed? "Stop bad guys from destroying/taking over world!" You're also forgetting that BFBC1 was DICE's first attempt at making a full campaign and now they're making a sequel. It's only natural to continue the campaign.[/quote] Yeah it did change it went from owning the Russians to owning the Americans just like that.
-
i can't take this guy seriously, he jumps from good to bad in like seconds and compares strictly to codm2. the way he talks about it is like he wants to like it but he to much of a fan of cod to admit it, it's kind of annoying really. someone should go over there and tell him that its ok to like more than one game.
-
I never really liked IGN in the first place. Seldom do I enjoy their reviews, etc.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] sweetgirl12 Damn you people need to relax. I played BC1 and i can say not much has changed,same old story and some new snow and jungles.[/quote]Well obviously you haven't played it enough. It [b]has[/b] changed, alot. To a better direction.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Combating fanboyism with more fanboyism doesn't prove or disprove anything. If it's the reviewer's opinion, it's the reviewer's opinion. Get over it and buy the game when it comes out.[/quote] I've bought more CoD games than BF games. Try harder.[/quote] Congratulations on owning more CoD games; it's completely irrelevant. You're just blowing things way out of proportion all because someone's view on a video game differs from yours.[/quote] Completely irrelevant? You're last post suggesting I'm a huge fanboy of BF. Erik's job was to review a game with as little bias as possible. [b]Yet, it was obvious that his mind was already set on the fact that he thinks MW2 is overall better.[/b] You can't give a review of a game when you've already shot it down because there's another game out there that you like more. If I wanted that, I could have asked anyone of my MW2 fanboy friends on their opinion of BFBC2. [/quote] i dont see where you're getting that impression, from what i read the review mentioned CoD twicw, and neither time did he say that CoD was better.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Combating fanboyism with more fanboyism doesn't prove or disprove anything. If it's the reviewer's opinion, it's the reviewer's opinion. Get over it and buy the game when it comes out.[/quote] I've bought more CoD games than BF games. Try harder.[/quote] Congratulations on owning more CoD games; it's completely irrelevant. You're just blowing things way out of proportion all because someone's view on a video game differs from yours.[/quote] Completely irrelevant? You're last post suggesting I'm a huge fanboy of BF. Erik's job was to review a game with as little bias as possible. Yet, it was obvious that his mind was already set on the fact that he thinks MW2 is overall better. You can't give a review of a game when you've already shot it down because there's another game out there that you like more. If I wanted that, I could have asked anyone of my MW2 fanboy friends on their opinion of BFBC2. [/quote] It's his JOB to compare games; his JOB to suggest one game is better than another. BC2 was MADE to challenge MW2, so the comparisons are warranted. He's not "shooting it down" due to a bias. He set it against the game it was supposed to topple, and it lost.
-
This has gotten ridiculous. Look at [url=http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/bfbc2/]this![/url] A petition to write a new review for BC2! Ha ha...I signed it for the lolz
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] xo u2 rokker [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] I've got to agree, I mean, his "rambo soldier" rant was so ridiculous, it almost made me laugh. Because duel-wielding shotguns is normal, and now, infantry men can call in tactical nukes! Whoopee![/quote] To be honest it was targeted at the Campaign.
-
Yeah, I thought some points the review made were off, like the one about the match ending abruptly and how the sound only got a 9 (which is still good, but I thought it deserved waaayyy better) or how he mentioned mainly singleplayer throughout the review and barely touched anything about the multiplayer. I'm gonna wait for the other two IGN reviews and what they write about the game before I completely facepalm at ign.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DarkGunner93 For people complaining about people complaining about the review. Read posts first. I'm not saying that it's bad cause his opinion is different, but the review is ridiculous. The review states that the game is bad because you can use every gun and vehicle. That the audio is worse than MW2 when it's known for having some of the best audio in any game. If the guy didn't like it as much as CoD and brought up valid reasons then fine, but he didn't.[/quote] He does actually. He doesn't just say "The game is stupid because you can do everything", he says that ability counter-acts any tense scenarios, or any feeling of an "epic" war environment. And you can't say anything about the audio in the campaign. Maybe it loses its effect there, or compared to MW2 it doesn't "sound" like a real war? Sound quality doesn't warrant a good review, the USE of sound does.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Combating fanboyism with more fanboyism doesn't prove or disprove anything. If it's the reviewer's opinion, it's the reviewer's opinion. Get over it and buy the game when it comes out.[/quote] I've bought more CoD games than BF games. Try harder.[/quote] Congratulations on owning more CoD games; it's completely irrelevant. You're just blowing things way out of proportion all because someone's view on a video game differs from yours.[/quote] Completely irrelevant? You're last post suggesting I'm a huge fanboy of BF. Erik's job was to review a game with as little bias as possible. Yet, it was obvious that his mind was already set on the fact that he thinks MW2 is overall better. You can't give a review of a game when you've already shot it down because there's another game out there that you like more. If I wanted that, I could have asked anyone of my MW2 fanboy friends on their opinion of BFBC2.
-
So should i get this game ?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DarkGunner93 For people complaining about people complaining about the review. Read posts first. I'm not saying that it's bad cause his opinion is different, but the review is ridiculous. The review states that the game is bad because you can use every gun and vehicle. That the audio is worse than MW2 when it's known for having some of the best audio in any game. If the guy didn't like it as much as CoD and brought up valid reasons then fine, but he didn't.[/quote] So you don't think poor pacing and presentation issues are valid points? Also, how do you differentiate between a game that has a "10" sound quality with a game that has a "9" sound quality?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Combating fanboyism with more fanboyism doesn't prove or disprove anything. If it's the reviewer's opinion, it's the reviewer's opinion. Get over it and buy the game when it comes out.[/quote] I've bought more CoD games than BF games. Try harder.[/quote] Congratulations on owning more CoD games; it's completely irrelevant. You're just blowing things way out of proportion all because someone's view on a video game differs from yours.
-
For people complaining about people complaining about the review. Read posts first. I'm not saying that it's bad cause his opinion is different, but the review is ridiculous. The review states that the game is bad because you can use every gun and vehicle. That the audio is worse than MW2 when it's known for having some of the best audio in any game. If the guy didn't like it as much as CoD and brought up valid reasons then fine, but he didn't.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Electabuzz [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Combating fanboyism with more fanboyism doesn't prove or disprove anything. If it's the reviewer's opinion, it's the reviewer's opinion. Get over it and buy the game when it comes out.[/quote] I've bought more CoD games than BF games. Try harder.
-
I played BC1 and can say plenty of things have changed graphics are up gameplay smoother and better, mechanics and realism is way up squad gameplay mechanics are beautiful and the campaign is going to be way better than the first one maybe you didn't play the demo enough or watch the videos to notice the changes!!!!!!!
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] sweetgirl12 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Damn you people need to relax. I played BC1 and i can say not much has changed,same old story and some new snow and jungles.[/quote] And you think the story line for CoD4 and MW2 has changed? "Stop bad guys from destroying/taking over world!" You're also forgetting that BFBC1 was DICE's first attempt at making a full campaign and now they're making a sequel. It's only natural to continue the campaign.
-
Only a mexican could jump that wall of text
-
None of you have played BC2's campaign yet, so your comments are all invalid. Maybe he's right about it, maybe he's wrong. You don't know that yet. Stop defending a game you haven't played and wait to make your own opinions about it once you actually do. If a review (an opinion from someone who plays all sorts of games for a living, and is therefore completely ALLOWED to make comparisons) really bothers you, don't read them seriously.
-
christ you fanboys are so annoying! A reviewer gave a game you might like a very high score! Be happy goddammit! Just because a reviewer references a similar title does not mean he thinks that the game is better. Not to mention the game isn't out yet! How the hell can you comment on the single-player?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ShadowHalo94 I stopped trusting IGN a long time ago. This review just proves I made the right decision. MW2's campaign was short. It wasn't in a "cinematic" style at all. The single player may have been epic, but it looks like it won't even come close to BFBC2's campaign. MW2's multiplayer is nothing special either. It's broken. The game is littered with glitches. There was not one glitch I experienced in the BFBC2 demo and that was just the demo! It's supposed to have a few glitches. Also, how could he comment about the soldiers in BFBC2 being able to use any weapon when it's the same in MW2? MW2 has a wide variety of weapons. Not only that, but you can use and AC130 and a Chopper Gunner. If he wants to get so technical, then why didn't he question the fact that any soldier can use an AC130 in MW2? This guy is clearly an MW2 fanboy. He thinks MW2 is the model for future FPS games (which is complete bull) and his review is completely biased. Way to go, IGN. Get to firing some employees. [/quote] Combating fanboyism with more fanboyism doesn't prove or disprove anything. If it's the reviewer's opinion, it's the reviewer's opinion. Get over it and buy the game when it comes out. [Edited on 02.27.2010 10:14 AM PST]
