Frontlines: Fuel of War - Is it any good?

[backup287]

lol i didnt mean to compare it too deeply to quake wars i meant to say it was a failure much like quake wars, i mean bf2 is the king of battlefield like games and quake wars and frontlines are both failures and **** copies who failed

 

[commandercup]

are you *****ing me!?

quake wars is not a failure... its just not as mass marketed as BF2 was... EA is king of marketing...

how the **** is BF2 better then quake wars? graphically its worse... creatively... its worse! combat... its worse! physics... its worse! ???

just because people are still playing BF2 more then quake wars doesn't mean its a failure... maybe to you, but not to the industry and the majority of gamers

 

[backup287]

Trust me buddy quake wars is a **** game compared to bf2, no doubt in my mind, but maybe there are some quake fanboys that enjoy it over bf2 but as for majority bf2 destroys quake wars

and i think bf2 graphics like own quake wars lol even for its time

 

[commandercup]

lol... you can't say that quake fanboys like quake when the only people who still stick with bf2 are fanboys of the bf series...

personally lol, I tried to get into quake 4, but I didn't like hopping around that much... I liked CSS a whole lot more.

also... I don't have to trust you, I've got both games, I've also played 1942 (I own it) and vietnam, and all the expansions of 1942 and 2142...

one of the few things that were great in bf2 were the jets... but quake wars tops it in all other aspects unless your just liking for a mil sim in which case bf2 isn't realistic anyways

 

[backup287]

w/e man i dont wanna argue, imo bf2 owns quake wars ive got both yes and i hate quake wars period

 

[commandercup]

give me reasons

 

[backup287]

k if u insist, bf2 has better graphics imo even for its time, quake is linear even for a open battlefield game because you have to go like one way to the objective and sniping is lame because they can see your bullets streak, the levels of quake wars are tiny and linear as ive said, and overall its just not fun you can only do like 1 objective at a time and in order? lame everyone has to do one thing and theres only like 1 or 2 way to each objective

 

[alexsabree]

I personally think they both suck

Seriously, you cant change another persons opinion... apparently backup likes bf2 better then quake wars vise-versa with commander cup.

I really don't even want to look at EA for making the next battlefield on console only... stupid *#@&($@ers

 

[backup287]

^ ya EA really sold us out! (there was also a battlefield modern combat only for consoles)

 

[commandercup]

k if u insist, bf2 has better graphics imo even for its time, quake is linear even for a open battlefield game because you have to go like one way to the objective and sniping is lame because they can see your bullets streak, the levels of quake wars are tiny and linear as ive said, and overall its just not fun you can only do like 1 objective at a time and in order? lame everyone has to do one thing and theres only like 1 or 2 way to each objective

and what can you do in BF? all you do is capture the points and run down enemy tickets...

while say the Soldiers are required to plant demo charges on a generator, the sniper may decide he wants to go and hack the enemy radars which give vision on the mini map to his team... or they may wan't to disguise and go hack into some of the turrets that the enemies constructed...

meanwhile the field ops might be harassing enemy fortifications with hammer launches or the other various types of artillery he can use...

in battlefield, you can... hmm... shoot?

if anything, the fact that there is only 1 main objective at a time is good because it focuses battle around that one spot, in battlefield unless your playing in an immense server, you'll be all alone for a good bit of time

about the map sizes, the sizes are about the same, many of the maps in quake are suited for smaller groups, but there are large ones like the ARK and some even larger then BF because they have literally two maps in one... (you hack into a portal as an objective to open a new part of the map in which literally the old map is discarded mid game)

also... the single objective at a time makes it so that teamwork is vital... if the constructor has to defuse a bomb, many people may start to spawn as constructors... but then you might need more soldiers to fend off vehicles, or more field ops to stop enemy advances, or more covert ops to go and backstab people etc.

in battlefield, you've got... nothing... sure, theres the spec ops which destroys commander stuff, but quake has that and more in the soldier class, its also got the medic which is much better in quake wars because the strogg can build "spawn hosts" off of dead bodies which lets people select one to spawn off for 1 time, medics can also call in supply crates much like bf2 commanders can, then theres what... theres nothing else!?

the one really cool thing about bf2 is global unlocks... but thats not really better or worse in either game since quake wars balances it with campaign based upgrades and a global ranking system

sniping is lame because the bullets streak? your dissing the combat because its different? thats like saying in BF2142... the turrets on the titan shoot big long streaks of light...

and there is no way you can say BF2 has better graphics then quake wars