Battlefield1942 & CoD? - No Comparison!! --- and any bots in the making? -1 reply

Please wait...

Frenz

For you..

50 XP

11th January 2004

0 Uploads

68 Posts

0 Threads

#1 14 years ago

i wasnt having a go at battlefield or anything i know the fans it has love the game but i was just annoyed that alot of things i read in forums campare the 2 2 each other, when i believe they are completly different. even though i do hate battlefield 1942.




..Armageddon..

Pwning is for n00bs i OWN

50 XP

25th November 2003

0 Uploads

146 Posts

0 Threads

#2 14 years ago

Sejanus, actually you can blame your lag for hitting things....mine is usually over 200..but that changes next week..yay!...but i always have to lead my targets on my computer by quite a bit to hit them...i get used to it though..




IncognitoAmigo

I don't spend enough time here

50 XP

16th January 2004

0 Uploads

19 Posts

0 Threads

#3 14 years ago

There is no comparison for Cod and bf1942 because there completly different i also hate bf1942 Cod Cutting edge




Frenz

For you..

50 XP

11th January 2004

0 Uploads

68 Posts

0 Threads

#4 14 years ago

mines 56k and my pings always over 500 so i cant get into most servers(takes me 20 minutes to find a server that lets my ping in) and then when im in i got so much lag that i have to predict where the guy will be in 3 seconds and shoot there instead of derectly there, or sneak up behind them when ther running straight foward!...lol, but i did find a server that runs without to much lagg and lets me in and is normally full allthough recently in the last 2 days they have been kicking me for high ping!:mad:....not happy. Anyway in about 2 weeks im changing from 56k dialup to 512k broadband so ill be able to spend alot more time on it without lag!:) they better watch out! By the way does anybody know how big my ping would be with 512k broadband???




sejanus

Dread thinks I'm a special person

50 XP

10th January 2003

0 Uploads

300 Posts

0 Threads

#5 14 years ago
..Armageddon..Sejanus, actually you can blame your lag for hitting things....mine is usually over 200..but that changes next week..yay!...but i always have to lead my targets on my computer by quite a bit to hit them...i get used to it though..

I know hence the J/K after what I said. I have played some slide show multiplayer games in the past myself! I was just kidding because the odd time when playing I'll run into someone that just isn't having a good game and they blame it on lag, but yeah it can be a real pain. I don't get it as much now with my 3.5 MB connection at home, and it let's me run the odd server now and then when the mood hits me.

and yeah both the games can be a blast it just depends what kind of mood your in. sometimes I want the more free flowing aspect just to have fun (bf42) other times when wanting to work as more of a squad then COD.

game on all, and see ya on the battlefield (whichever one that may be!) S




first timer...pl

I don't spend enough time here

50 XP

16th January 2004

0 Uploads

16 Posts

0 Threads

#6 14 years ago

the only common thing they got between the two games is that they are wwII based, other than that its like comparing apples. for example, you can win a campaign in bf1942 without firing a single shot. (maybe im streching it a little bit but you do not have to put much effort into winnnig) another thing i found was that once i completed all the sp 1942 missions i have not picked it up again, the sp in cod is totaly different, you can play it more than once. i like the fact of different vehicles, and possibilities the game has in 1942. but overall i dont think i'll play the game again.




Fezarella

Lacoste

50 XP

17th December 2002

0 Uploads

6,610 Posts

0 Threads

#7 14 years ago

I like both games alot and i think they are both very diffrent so its stupid to compare them




Decepticon

Movie guy for some mods.

50 XP

6th January 2004

0 Uploads

89 Posts

0 Threads

#8 14 years ago

has anyone tested the farcry beta? oops sorry im way off topic. anyway, battlefield was more of a revolution in gameplay and map size for fps games. cod goes back to the roots of fps and goes all out with close quarters firefights. Sure cod isnt really ground breaking, but it still stands out from the pack. And i take it people who complain about bunnyhopping wouldnt play unreal2k3, so i guess they will miss out on the goodness that will be 2k4.




Blehh

Rifleman

50 XP

16th January 2003

0 Uploads

2,894 Posts

0 Threads

#9 14 years ago
Decepticonhas anyone tested the farcry beta? oops sorry im way off topic. anyway, battlefield was more of a revolution in gameplay and map size for fps games. cod goes back to the roots of fps and goes all out with close quarters firefights.

That pretty much sums it up.




Decepticon

Movie guy for some mods.

50 XP

6th January 2004

0 Uploads

89 Posts

0 Threads

#10 14 years ago
first timer...pl.... once i completed all the sp 1942 missions i have not picked it up again, the sp in cod is totaly different, you can play it more than once.

well thats a pretty bold statement. cod single player missions r exactly the same, each time u play them, over and over. the only thing that can change is the difficulty, but if u play it on hard, why go back and do it easier? in battlefield 1942, sure the single player sucks compared to cod's, but thats only because the bots suck. how can u say u cant play a single player game more than once? did u only get in one vehicle? or only go one side? or only use one weapon? man there r so many different things u can do in battlefield, this is what helps u from the boredom that is bots, but why would u even bother with single player bf1942 when u can go online? the game wasnt even inteded for single player in mind. 1942 is not a fps, its an online fps. battlefield has redifined the way alot of people play fps games, and many games will follow the trend. im quite pleased cod stuck with the more traditional fps, which i think in some ways is what has contributed to its success, proving that gamers still like to shoot each other the old fashioned way.