Celtichugs42 wrote: »
With the Pacific content, the recent updates and fixes along with the recent (great!) news that the next title wont be until 2021 or 2020, it can only be upwards and onwards from now. My guess is that DICE finally told EA to back off and allow them to make games for games, not for sales.
If this is true, a note from a gamer and BF fan to EA - thank you. Allow DICE and BF developers to do their work properly and not under the stress we hear so much about.
DaMutha1 wrote: »
Anyone who doesn't like Iwo Jima breakthrough should just quit Battlefield forever.
S1n31ra wrote: »
How on earth can people think this is good???
S1n31ra wrote: »
Huh??? More bugs than I can count. This is awful.
Nic727_1 wrote: »
I love the new maps! It finally feels like a true Battlefield game with dogfight, tanks, infantry, etc.
Now I wish they could remake the default maps to look like this.
jroggs wrote: »
Bugs are dismaying. I've had a lot of visual stuttering, audio stuttering, and artifacting, and I also had a couple "undead" moments where I was just stuck dead but unable to respawn and had to quit out of the match entirely.
Iwo Jima sucks. It's probably reasonably representative of the real battlefield, but it is simply not fun to play. It's way too open and lacks interesting detail past the beach. (And I say that as someone who liked Galicia.) I dunno, maybe it's like Op Underground and I'll find a way to like it with more playtime, but my first impressions are poor.
Pacific Storm on the other hand is just wonderful. It's beautiful and plays very well. I need to give it more time as well, but it's a strong contender for the best map in the game.
One thing I do want to say: DICE, if you're going to give the American team four or five tanks, then my Japanese Assault needs more explosives.
Love them, but I want conquest as well. When do we get that?
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!