swgohome.com

(SWGO)Minas_Thirith wrote:

THEWULFMAN wrote:It's 6 years old actually. What's with the hostility? I never said BF3 was a bad game, or that it shouldn't be played, or that the SWGO community can't support it. My point was that you shouldn't switch games just because the new one looks nicer.

Lol wulf that's mrjamwin's normal talking, i'd take it more as a joke or sarcasm then a hostile comment

And about BF3 vs SWBF2 there isn't a comparison, their just in my eyes diffrent types of games, you couldn't compare a MMO to a FPS right?
Well SWBF2 is so old that i wouldn't even consider it much of a FPS especially with HA wich is TPS, and like yanny said, i'd love to see a SPS game

38 has also told me that's just how Jamwin talks, so I apologize to him and everyone else for my lack of knowledge of all the members here. I did literally join 3 hours ago, so I'm going to need a little bit more time to get used to everyone.


As for SWBF being a FPS, it is more or less. I rarely ever use the FP mode though, I happen to love third person.

NP on the knowledge thing....i did far worse when i joined SWGO over a year ago...if you think my gramer is bad...you sould have seen my first 10 posts

And yes i also play on Third person mode, since i can see more and rolling is handier, but i for some reason never miss a shot on first person.

MT

I even look back at my first posts and how stupid I was. Don't worry you'll get used to it.

ATCStewart wrote:I even look back at my first posts and how stupid I was. Don't worry you'll get used to it.

Yeah my first couple hundred posts on Gametoast were really bad. That was like 13 months ago. I've matured a lot in the past year. Anyway, I digress.

Hostility? Hell I was sweet talking to you. You need freaking hug or something. Wait till Narg gets here. You haven't seen anything yet!!!!!!

mrjamwin wrote:Hostility? Hell I was sweet talking to you. You need freaking hug or something. Wait till Narg gets here. You haven't seen anything yet!!!!!!

Probably.

Okey peeps, I have a problem.
I've played in MW2 and heard MW (1) was a way better then anything. From my personal experiences I know MW2 is really fast, there's a lot of action but also second that of russian aimboters and kids crying through micro "run away, predator is comin!".
I played in beta of Bad Company 2 and it was quite slow for me.. I didn't feel the satisfaction from gaming and the main thing- killing! There are tanks in which you can kill so many ppl but when you will be a normal trooper.. you won't kill a 1/4 of them. While going to one point you could have philosophical debate with yourself about sense of life. In MW2 I hadn't a time for wondering about anything.
The point is, taking into consideration this things, is there anyone who has played BOTH in BF3 and MW/MW2 and can tell me why I should buy BF3? I got win7 so I'm considering this step...

BF3 is also more about teamwork. Each class can compliment the team and working together can work wonders. You can go lone wolf as well and still be successful but not as effective as being in a squad (team of 4). When you're in a server with 32 people on each team, it can get quite chaotic (lot's of action, explosions etc.). Sure vehicles give an advantage, but against a well organized team, it has no chance. I often have a higher kill/death ratio while only going on foot (mostly in Urban maps) versus being in a vehicle.
The health regeneration is also much slower than in MW, some game modes remove the ability to regenerate so you need to have someone on your team that can deploy medkits for healing.
If you camp/stay too long in a building or location, you will be snuffed out and eliminated before you can properly escape, so always be on the move. Buildings/Objects can be destroyed that give one cover, so you have to adapt to the changing surroundings and make the best of it (I hope they will make further improvements on it with patches).

Watch reviews, game plays and general vids on the games. It will greatly help you get a better idea of what will fit you.

Cheers

Yanoda

I'm totally agreeing with yanoda here, in BC2 things move very fast, altough it depends on the map, game mode, and how many players there are.
If you do a conquest map as big as vietnam hastings with 8 players, your bound to be utterly bored, however a rush mode with 24 players will be a full war in my opinions...and yes teamwork, iv'e found that working together in a team is alwayes better, also note the team based points by just even resupplying with a kit you just have to dump on the ground...

You also gain points for doing this with non-squad mates but way less, EX: everytime a teamates resupplies of your ammoB you get 10 points in BC2, if it's a squad mate you get 20 wich is +100% from the squad then just a normal teamate, the same thing counts for spotting and assists.

MT

Thanks Yanoda & Minas,
Well, teamwork. Yes, I'd love it. If I can finish some games in co op I do it with my bro and it's sort of fun. However, I see a problem there. I just can't imagine that everyone on the server would know what to do and would do the same thing together in one time. You know, I agree that teamworking is a crucial thing for this game but I guess it's only possible in clans, am I right? And there goes hours in which such clans can play together.... so if I'm understanding in right way: without clans in time zone that matches you, you won't have fun from this game.
The graphics- I have a good graphics card gtx260 so in middle details in full HD it should hang this game and it would be pleasurable to playing but I'm pretty sure (mates who tried beta told me) that trailers/screenshots make the game prettier than it actually is. Ugh.. hard decision, cos I would like to try to play in it and cooperate but without right clan it would be a waste of my money (this game costs a lot in Poland). :/ Have we an SWGO clan in there..?