it's alright. kinda feels similar to bf1, but a bit more faster-paced

im still on the fence about getting the actual game tho

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

Because there is one already.

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

Because there is one already.

there's a battlefield 1 already

because battlefield 7 ate 9

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

It already exists. The first Battlefield from 2002 was never called Battlefield 1, it was just Battlefield 1942. For example, they could name the next SF title "Street Fighter I" to signal a throwback or reboot because the original game was just "Street Fighter", but they couldn't name the one after that Street Fighter II since a game by that that exact name already exists. It makes more sense with BF1 one though since it went back to the earliest time period covered by the series and the name is a reference to WW1. All other games in the series were set in WW2, Vietnam, modern day, and near / far future.

this is not a satisfactory answer

Put a good amount of time in it and it feels pretty good even with the buggy shit.

Got a 10+ kill with one of those fart rockets and I fucking died. Such a strange sound to be afraid of.

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 05:37:05 AM

Quote from: Flee on September 10, 2018, 04:45:24 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

It already exists. The first Battlefield from 2002 was never called Battlefield 1, it was just Battlefield 1942. For example, they could name the next SF title "Street Fighter I" to signal a throwback or reboot because the original game was just "Street Fighter", but they couldn't name the one after that Street Fighter II since a game by that that exact name already exists. It makes more sense with BF1 one though since it went back to the earliest time period covered by the series and the name is a reference to WW1. All other games in the series were set in WW2, Vietnam, modern day, and near / far future.

this is not a satisfactory answer

Context and basic human intellect is why it’s not called BF2

context and basic human intellect should've prevented the name BF1

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

Because there is one already.

There was also already a God of War and a Star Wars Battlefront (&2)

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 10:43:43 AM

Quote from: Rescue on September 10, 2018, 10:29:53 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 05:37:05 AM

Quote from: Flee on September 10, 2018, 04:45:24 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

It already exists. The first Battlefield from 2002 was never called Battlefield 1, it was just Battlefield 1942. For example, they could name the next SF title "Street Fighter I" to signal a throwback or reboot because the original game was just "Street Fighter", but they couldn't name the one after that Street Fighter II since a game by that that exact name already exists. It makes more sense with BF1 one though since it went back to the earliest time period covered by the series and the name is a reference to WW1. All other games in the series were set in WW2, Vietnam, modern day, and near / far future.

this is not a satisfactory answer

Context and basic human intellect is why it’s not called BF2

context and basic human intellect should've prevented the name BF1

It was set in WWI and we don’t normally title the first game in a series with “one”

That’s context and common sense enough for the average person to differentiate the game

not even close

why didn't they use the roman numeral "I" rather "1"

it's like they wanted to look as retarded as possible

Quote from: Rescue on September 10, 2018, 12:40:53 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 10:43:43 AM

Quote from: Rescue on September 10, 2018, 10:29:53 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 05:37:05 AM

Quote from: Flee on September 10, 2018, 04:45:24 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

It already exists. The first Battlefield from 2002 was never called Battlefield 1, it was just Battlefield 1942. For example, they could name the next SF title "Street Fighter I" to signal a throwback or reboot because the original game was just "Street Fighter", but they couldn't name the one after that Street Fighter II since a game by that that exact name already exists. It makes more sense with BF1 one though since it went back to the earliest time period covered by the series and the name is a reference to WW1. All other games in the series were set in WW2, Vietnam, modern day, and near / far future.

this is not a satisfactory answer

Context and basic human intellect is why it’s not called BF2

context and basic human intellect should've prevented the name BF1

It was set in WWI and we don’t normally title the first game in a series with “one”

That’s context and common sense enough for the average person to differentiate the game

not even close

why didn't they use the roman numeral "I" rather "1"

it's like they wanted to look as retarded as possible

Well they recognize that people aren’t pedantic assholes that care about I’s and 1’s

They wanted to capitalize on the fact that a game has never been set in WWI so they made sure to put “1” directly in the title (whether it’s a “1” or “I”)

WWII has been explored enough to where an explicit “II” is not needed
Plus they wanted to mark it as the next installment in the franchise, not the next in a Battlefield reboot

I thought you didn’t even care about multiplayer games

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 12:47:41 PM

Quote from: Rescue on September 10, 2018, 12:40:53 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 10:43:43 AM

Quote from: Rescue on September 10, 2018, 10:29:53 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 10, 2018, 05:37:05 AM

Quote from: Flee on September 10, 2018, 04:45:24 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on September 09, 2018, 11:40:37 AM

so why didn't they call it Battlefield 2

It already exists. The first Battlefield from 2002 was never called Battlefield 1, it was just Battlefield 1942. For example, they could name the next SF title "Street Fighter I" to signal a throwback or reboot because the original game was just "Street Fighter", but they couldn't name the one after that Street Fighter II since a game by that that exact name already exists. It makes more sense with BF1 one though since it went back to the earliest time period covered by the series and the name is a reference to WW1. All other games in the series were set in WW2, Vietnam, modern day, and near / far future.

this is not a satisfactory answer

Context and basic human intellect is why it’s not called BF2

context and basic human intellect should've prevented the name BF1

It was set in WWI and we don’t normally title the first game in a series with “one”

That’s context and common sense enough for the average person to differentiate the game

not even close

why didn't they use the roman numeral "I" rather "1"

it's like they wanted to look as retarded as possible

Well they recognize that people aren’t pedantic assholes that care about I’s and 1’s

They wanted to capitalize on the fact that a game has never been set in WWI so they made sure to put “1” directly in the title (whether it’s a “1” or “I”)

WWII has been explored enough to where an explicit “II” is not needed
Plus they wanted to mark it as the next installment in the franchise, not the next in a Battlefield reboot

I thought you didn’t even care about multiplayer games

1 -> V -> ||

Battlefield is gain.

Quote from: FatherlyNick on September 10, 2018, 12:52:41 PM

Not educated enough to play the beta.

>there's actually people not playing the game because there's female and black soldiers in it

Fucking hell.

Nah, I'm just not buying any new EA games (unless its cheap like Titanfall 2 [Still wish Respawn was under Bethesda])
But some ppl were genuinely upset that there is a crippled woman being the front and center of WW2 but BF was never historically accurate, was it? I didn't understand those people. Other camp of ppl got upset because instead of addressing the backlash, EA simply told people to not buy the game if they don't like it.