Battlefield: Bad Company - not on PC

[Alex The PC Gamer]

This is one of the most anticipated games of all BF2 and similar genre fans. BF2(2004) was extremely successful on the PC and is still being played by millions today.

That being said, the next step for EA & Dice is Battlefield: Bad Company where graphics are better than ever, everything is destructible, it includes a single player campaign as well as its reputable multiplayer campaigns.

So why did they choose to make it exclusive to X360 and PS3?

Your thoughts and comments on this are appreciated.

Regards,

Alex

 

[physx7]

So why did they choose to make it exclusive to X360 and PS3?

Because they wanted to irritate PC gamers.

 

[stemnin]

because it's going to suck. I doubt the multiplayer will have the scale of war bf2 has on a 64 player map. 24 player max, no jets.. etc

battlefield: bad game.

the first trailer I saw looked alot like bf2, with a the building they were in looked suspiciously like the buildings in cerbere landing on the 2nd "elevation" by the stairs, to the point of the palettes being in the same position from karkand.

Anyway, the game had been delayed to "fiscal 2009". so that's a while from now..

 

[3Ball]

This is one of the most anticipated games of all BF2 and similar genre fans. BF2(2004) was extremely successful on the PC and is still being played by millions today.

That being said, the next step for EA & Dice is Battlefield: Bad Company where graphics are better than ever, everything is destructible, it includes a single player campaign as well as its reputable multiplayer campaigns.

So why did they choose to make it exclusive to X360 and PS3?

Your thoughts and comments on this are appreciated.

Regards,

Alex

Battlefield 3 will be very similar to this game (Same engine and I am sure many of the same mechanics) and will be on PC (hopefully making it better than the console version and most likely so), so I wouldn't worry about it.

Best,

3Ball

 

[Alex The PC Gamer]

Well, I'm glad to hear they will make a Battlefield 3 then. I had read speculations about it but it was all paperwork and partnership agreements...nothing else.

Where did you guys get your sources?

 

[3Ball]

Well, I'm glad to hear they will make a Battlefield 3 then. I had read speculations about it but it was all paperwork and partnership agreements...nothing else.

Where did you guys get your sources?

I realize that this is not the most reliable and you have probably already seen this, but other than common sense that BF3 will actually release we have these sites. One with leaked info and the others hinting towards the possibility. Now I understand that there is a chance that it may not come out, but the chances of EA not trying to make money on one of there biggest PC franchises are very slim imo.

http://www.digitalbattle.com/2007/10/09/breaking-battlefield-3-leaked-info/
http://www.battlefield3.biz/?p=3
http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/View.php?view=Articles.Detail&id=5

Best,

3Ball

 

[stemnin]

what about battlefield heroes lol, team fortress 2 knockoff. and its free

 

[Alex The PC Gamer]

I know...just saw the Debut Trailer...looks awesome if you ask me!

 

[stemnin]

this might be more my type of game than tf2, this does look like fun

[flash=480,392]http://www.gametrailers.com/remote_wrap.php?mid=31298[/flash]

 

[ApartmentsEstepona]

Don't you guys mean Battlefield4?

Correct me if I'm wrong but:

Battlefield 1942
Battlefield 2
Battlefield 2142

This would be the 4th installment right?




Estepona Apartments

 

[Alex The PC Gamer]

Don't you guys mean Battlefield4?

Correct me if I'm wrong but:

Battlefield 1942
Battlefield 2
Battlefield 2142

This would be the 4th installment right?

Estepona Apartments

We assume Battlefield 3 because Battlefield 2142 isn't really a 3rd installment..but more of a half installment (Battlefield 2.5).

Technically, if we considered Battlefield Heroes it would then be Battelfield 5 (or Battlefield 6 if we considered Battlefield: Bad Company)!

Battlefield 3 makes more sense

 

[blacksci]

Wrong, bf1942, 1942 road to rome, 1942 secret weapons of wwII, battlefield Vietnam, battlefield 2, battlefield 2142, not to mention the battlefield vietnam world war 2 mod. And the expansions for bf2. Dont get yourself confused battlefield doesnt keep with a progressive naming system since bf2, and while were all saying battlefield 3, it could be something else entirely. I know quite a few people who have unrealistic hopes that badcompany will be modded to the comp, i wouldnt buy it if it was because i think that the game play wouldnt reflect the game experience weve all come to expect from this franchise. On a side note, 2142 wasnt really the game play we expected either, while it was a new approach, it still has many glitches that glitchers like to take advantage of because they have no skill, and EA let us down on giving us a polished game that was free of defects for the most part at release. I cant help but think how many people werent even able to play the game for the first 6 months or so, because EA decided for this installment, WE would be there beta testers. Dont get me wrong, i love the battlefield series as much as anyone, but if the next battlefield installment is as lame as 2142, I think EA is going to loose many a loyal customer.

 

[agentofdoom]

because it's going to suck. I doubt the multiplayer will have the scale of war bf2 has on a 64 player map. 24 player max, no jets.. etc

battlefield: bad game.

the first trailer I saw looked alot like bf2, with a the building they were in looked suspiciously like the buildings in cerbere landing on the 2nd "elevation" by the stairs, to the point of the palettes being in the same position from karkand.

Anyway, the game had been delayed to "fiscal 2009". so that's a while from now..

i'm pretty sure that the fiscal 2009 is from april 2008 to something.

 

[Fathis]

It's quite easy t say why they made it 4 xbox and ps3, simply because they had something with the ppl which sell these 2 gaming consoles, but with the pc is different, evry1 has got a pc and every1 can play but if the ppl buy ps3s and xboxes every1 gets more $$, simple as that...

 

[KingLoftusXII]

Battlefield on a console just doesn't translate. Cod4 does, I have both, but Battlefield doesn't. Bad Co. is fun, but in the 2 weeks I've had it for the PS3, I haven't played it much. On a PC it'd be better than BF2, on a console it's just...a game.

Rumor has it 128 people for BF3 this fall. Can't wait...

*edit, just checked the dates...nice job Fathis, bring up something 1/2 year old...

 

[Hellboy]

Battlefield on a console just doesn't translate. Cod4 does, I have both, but Battlefield doesn't. Bad Co. is fun, but in the 2 weeks I've had it for the PS3, I haven't played it much. On a PC it'd be better than BF2, on a console it's just...a game.

Rumor has it 128 people for BF3 this fall. Can't wait...

*edit, just checked the dates...nice job Fathis, bring up something 1/2 year old...

At this rate we have more hardware comming out than games to run on it...

Im feeling that the PC is starting to be ignored...

I have bought over the years at least a 100 games for the pc - some crap - most good...

But even the games magazines for pc's are finding it a struggle to print stuff and they have certainly got thinner...

We need a forum pact.. Do not download pirate games.. Buy them....

Anyway comming back to Battlefield.. The best bits are the mods - Desert Combat and Forgotten hope are just the best... If it wasnt for Desert Combat, im sure BF would be as famous as it is now....

 

[KingLoftusXII]

I endlessly played a mod'd capture the flag desert combat.

As for games on a PC, there's a huge advantage developing games for a console. Set specs and you know everyone can play. Crysis sales tanked relatively because everyone knew it was graphically crushing. I'd bet there's a ton of lost sales due to some people not wanting to play a game at low setting getting 15fps...

 

[exfileme]

Battlefield does translate to the console, and does so amazingly well with Bad Company... at least on the Xbox 360. Unfortunately, the game seriously needed mouse/keyboard input, as there was just something screwy with the sensitivity. Still, I gave the game a "9" and my review should be up any day now (granted it's still not in Rob's spam box)...

 

[purplerat]

This seems very similiar to COD skipping the PC with 3 but coming back strong with 4. Other then the obvious numerical gap between 2 and 4, would anybody even remember that they made a COD3? I think developers do this when they realize PC gamers aren't going to buy something but have a much better title right around the corner. Console gamers are more likely to buy crap title after crap title where as it's not worth the extra development for a title that the more educated PC gamer will avoid. On a console 3 so-so titles may sell better than 1 really good one. On the PC it's likely to be the other way around.

 

[beatnik]

I played the demo for bad company a little bit and was left very underwhelmed. It honestly felt a bit hookie to me. Maybe its just me, but I guess im a PC elitist. I love my 360 for some games, but for any multiplayer fps, it just must be on a computer. It only feels natural with a mouse and keyboard to me. Im more than willing to wait for a better battlefield title to come out on the pc. Bad company is just a mediocre game release just for money. The good reviews for this game leave me almost as confused as the good reviews for civ: revolution did.

 

[Cypressstreet]

In my opinion I think the reason why EA went with console is because the hardware is factory. What I mean is that everyone of us on this chat room has a different type of PC, (ie graphic, processor) with all different parts. This is one of the main reason why BF2/2142 was so hard to play on people PC's crashes, glitches and a whole mess of other problems (Guilty). However, PS3 and XBOX360 is the same hardware no matter who owns it. Unless you know how to upgrade your console!!LOL

 

[3Ball]

In my opinion I think the reason why EA went with console is because the hardware is factory. What I mean is that everyone of us on this chat room has a different type of PC, (ie graphic, processor) with all different parts. This is one of the main reason why BF2/2142 was so hard to play on people PC's crashes, glitches and a whole mess of other problems (Guilty). However, PS3 and XBOX360 is the same hardware no matter who owns it. Unless you know how to upgrade your console!!LOL

lol, I am going to just pretend like you didnt just say that.

Best,

3Ball

 

[donjuanzx9]

Don't you guys mean Battlefield4?

Correct me if I'm wrong but:

Battlefield 1942
Battlefield 2
Battlefield 2142http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_2142

This would be the 4th installment right?


Wrong !!!

You forgot Battlefield vietnam !!

so it would be installment 5

 

[Hellboy]

Don't you guys mean Battlefield4?

Correct me if I'm wrong but:

Battlefield 1942
Battlefield 2
Battlefield 2142http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_2142

This would be the 4th installment right?


Wrong !!!

You forgot Battlefield vietnam !!

so it would be installment 5

Battlefield Vietnam was a 1.5 - in between 1942 and Bf 2 if you like,, never liked Vietnam...

Battlefield 2142 was like 2.5 and we are awaiting 3...

I assume we will get 3.5 if pcs are still playing games by then

 

[MrIcky]

This seems very similiar to COD skipping the PC with 3 but coming back strong with 4. Other then the obvious numerical gap between 2 and 4, would anybody even remember that they made a COD3? I think developers do this when they realize PC gamers aren't going to buy something but have a much better title right around the corner. Console gamers are more likely to buy crap title after crap title where as it's not worth the extra development for a title that the more educated PC gamer will avoid. On a console 3 so-so titles may sell better than 1 really good one. On the PC it's likely to be the other way around.

COD 3 was done by a different developer than 2 and 4 and was weak because of it. I think your logic is flawed. Calling console players 'less educated' is pretty assinine. Console players have to walk into the game store and decide what to spend their money on just like pc players. If anything, console players have to be more discerning because there are so many more choices- although they do have the option of selling games back or renting before you buy a questionable titles. If sales accurately reflect where PC developers should spend their resources, then developers should all go work for Blizzard on WoW expansions or recolorize Bejeweled. That's what the "more educated" PC gamer is voting on with his/her dollars.

Blizzard is keeping the dream alive. The funny thing about Diablo is it's almost perfectly designed for console use. Assuming D3 follows the mold of D1 and D2, Blizzard is literally throwing away an invitation to print money to prove their love for you.