Battlefield 3, FOR SERIOUS. No not BF:BC2 or BF1943 or BF:Heroes

[Mr. Tastix]

I do not believe you can accurately formulate an opinion of a game before playing it.

This argument I can understand but how else am I suppose to "accurately" rate a game based off World War 2? It's based off something that happened in real life, therefore any game based off WW2 I pretty much can read about in articles relating to the War itself.

I strongly believe there is nothing new to be bought to the table about WW2. Like I said above, it's about a war that happened in REAL LIFE. What more needs to be said?

Yes because the only purpose of a video game is to directly reflect real world experiences just like movies are.

Movies never had to reflect real world experiences, neither did video games. And I'd honestly prefer they didn't, I'm fairly sure most people play video games to get AWAY from reality, not to be reminded of it.

That's beside the point anyway. My point is it's been done to death. If this topic was about a new Mario or Zelda game I'd say the same thing (and really, both of those games are the same bloody concept anyways). I also say the same about all these crappy fantasy-based MMOs that are all rip-offs of the same damn thing.

Now, even though these concepts may be overused this doesn't mean someone can come along and spruce it up and make a bloody awesome game out of it. So BF3 may be a "next big thing" for all I know. However, I'm just saying:

It's not new IP and it's yet another war game. Same goes for fantasy-based RPG games - just because I haven't killed a dragon or shot someone in your game doesn't mean I haven't done it before, somewhere else.

Also note that this doesn't affect whether I will play it or not. I still will to try it, but I'm not going to be playing it with too high expectations. I'll play it like any other game. Rate the storyline, rate the gameplay, rate the graphics and the audio (first two are priorities). And if I find any of it sub-par to what I like, I'll dismiss it.

I don't play many games with high expectations anymore. I've been disappointed in the past, call me a pessimist but I call 'em how I see 'em.

[Siva]

If you're expecting any storyline to rate out of a Battlefield game then you are doing it wrong. Not every game is about story, some are just about fun.

Remember when we played games for fun

[clyzm]

If you're expecting any storyline to rate out of a Battlefield game then you are doing it wrong. Not every game is about story, some are just about fun.

Remember when we played games for fun

L4D

[James]

[Mr. Tastix]

If you're expecting any storyline to rate out of a Battlefield game then you are doing it wrong. Not every game is about story, some are just about fun.

Remember when we played games for fun

I'm also arguing that factor. I play games mostly for gameplay, not storyline. But what more can you possibly add to these games? You shoot them, they die. You get new guns to shoot them, they die faster. Some games have power ups, so you can kill them. Guess what? THAT'S RIGHT.

FASTER (even temporary invincibility helps with the process of killing people faster).

This is pretty much for every first-person shooter out there. Adding "classes" like TF2 does can add to it, but ultimately, you're still shooting shit and it's still dying.

Most of these shooter games rely on their storylines. Because honestly, how much more can you add to a shooting game besides guns, explosives and loads of gore and death?

[Baleout]

Most of these shooter games rely on their storylines. Because honestly, how much more can you add to a shooting game besides guns, explosives and loads of gore and death?

Hookers and a dude shouting one-liners.

[James]

FARE
THEE
WELL

[Mr. Tastix]

Most of these shooter games rely on their storylines. Because honestly, how much more can you add to a shooting game besides guns, explosives and loads of gore and death?

Hookers and a dude shouting one-liners.

THEY KILLED HIM.

AND HE'S NEVER COMING BACK...

For a few years at worst and probably best.