Jump to content

Talk:Battlefield: Bad Company 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.120.195.191 (talk) at 22:44, 7 March 2010 (→‎start up "troubles"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconVideo games C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Release year confusion.

To prevent violating 3RR. Let me make this clear Bad Company 2 is not releasing Winter 2009 it is coming on year 2010 Q1. The official site makes it very clear "To get ready for assault this winter, players can prepare for action in Battlefield 1943." Nowhere it states Bad Company 2 is coming this winter it is talking about Battlefield 1943.--SkyWalker (talk) 08:04, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gamestop marked it as September, 2009, but it isn't particularly reliable at all. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 08:48, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No Battlefield 1943 is being released this summer , Bad company 2 is released this winter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.109.201 (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No release date has been confirmed. Retailer pages or gamefaqs are not valid sources. Wait until press release. Wiki Werbelwind (talk) 13:54, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this link: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3175624 a valid enough resource for release date? It appears to be from the EA GameCon press conference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.48.33.199 (talk) 00:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant information?

where is the wins/loses section and streaks for consecutive wins? what kind of game would not have wins and loses —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.242.138.192 (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Okay, pardon me if I'm wrong, but the entire dog tag system was in Bad Company 1. Should the article mention, then, "an as of yet undisclosed dog tag system"? Also, the points displaying on the screen was also in Bad Co. 1. Should this be removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.211.8 (talk) 01:55, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it shouldn't. They were also available in BF2142. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.34.29 (talk) 03:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]


I think more game information should be added —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.83.142 (talk) 23:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rated: Mature

Everyone knows that if there is blood involved, the game will get an M rating. The first Bad Company didn't have blood and was rated T. So im guess since this has blood, it's going to be rated M.--70.247.73.252 (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)--70.247.73.252 (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)--70.247.73.252 (talk) 20:34, 14 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe, maybe not. It's not Wikipedia's place to decide or guess. --Thejadefalcon (talk) 10:13, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

plenty of games have blood and a t rating, its all about how much and how gratuitous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.171.183.151 (talk) 18:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Uncharted 2: Among Thieves", and even "Uncharted: Drake's Fortune" had blood, and those game are still rated Teen. In my opinion, it would be extremely stupid on their part to make this a Mature rated game. This could be the game that proves, "Just because it's rated Mature means it must be better", is a false statement. And if you really think about it, the first game was rated teen, so to make the second game Mature, they would probably lose a good number of players. The first game got great reviews, and it was Teen. I don't know about everyone else, but when I play a game, if my character is shot, or there is a cut scene, I don't want them dropping the F-bomb every second or in that case, cursing at all. A few minor curse words here and there are fine, just look at the first Bad Company game. So come on! Great games CAN be rated Teen. And in all honesty, the PEGI (Pan European Game Information)rating is 16, which is what it was for the first game, so I don't think it will be rated M.--Walking Target13 (talk) 17:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original research. Since when have censors had brains?[citation needed] --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 17:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, but I still think it would be ridiculously stupid of them to make this game rated Mature. If they play this off right, and make it Teen, I can foresee this game getting great ratings and praise. Probably better ratings than Modern Warfare 2, not that I'm saying that game was bad. I quite enjoy it. But I still liked Bad Company 1 better. The story hooked me right from the beginning, plus it was rated Teen, not to mention...I don't think that Bad Company 2 will be banned from Russia. Good games can be Teen.--Walking Target13 (talk) 20:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No Battlefield game has ever been rated Mature. Battlefield: Vietnam had blood in it, too, and it was still rated T. I think that the rating should stay RP for now, personally. Link 486 (talk) 02:20, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where did we find that Battlefield Bad Company 2 is rated mature. I went on the ESRB website and searched and nothing showed yet, I went on the Battlefield Bad Company 2 official blog, still says RP-T and a couple of other sites, and they all say RP. The only site that I was on that said it was M was GameStop, and they told people that Mercenaries 2: world in flames was going to be M. I don't know about everyone else, but I think that until one of the official sites says otherwise, it should remain RP on this page.

Organization

This article needs to be better structured and more collected, if someone could do that who is much better at editing than me that would be nice. Littlefatmonkey (talk)

I agree, the "gameplay" section seems more like a random dump for information, and should focus on the core gameplay mechanics. I would do this, but I don't want to completely delete all of the unrelated stuff outright. Jayrossss (talk) 01:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the gameplay section is a bit of a mess and needs some cleaning. I'd get around to it myself, but I'm afraid I'll mess things up. 24.67.177.162 (talk) 06:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

"The online multiplayer demo for the Xbox 360 version of the game was released on January 28, 2010, and will run untill Febuary 24th. It contains one multiplayer map called "Port Valdez" in the "Rush" mode only." that much should be sufficient.

"Each class has one weapon upgrade unique to the class, with other multi-class upgrades in various class's including primary weapons, secondary weapons and accessories. The highest rank achievable (in demo) is rank 3 with three rockers that looks like the Army rank of Seargent. Veterans of Bad Company will find "Rush" mode similar to "Gold Rush" with the exception of the "Gold Crates". They look similar except the name "M-COM" is now what your attacking or defending. Another noticable difference is that you can no longer cause damage to the crate or "M-COM" causing it to be destroyed, it must be armed to destroy it. Upgrades are not chosen after ranking up anymore, they are achieved by points scored with the character class you are using. If you want to upgrade the "Engineer" weapons, you must use that class and score points as an "Engineer" in order to gain upgrades for that class. This makes you have to become proficient in each class in order to upgrade each class. Major change in the "Recon" class, being that bullets now drop based on distance traveled. This means you now have to aim half a click, a click or more above your target depending on how far away your target is. Combine that with the travel time needed to lead a target, this makes headshots a challenge to some and greatly increases the realisticness of actually sniping somone vs. real life. The button layouts have changed quite a bit, but you do have the option to switch the buttons to a near similar "Bad Company 1" layout, regardless though, the "D Pad" is now used in any button layout. "Left stick click" no longer changes your view in vehicles, that has sadly been replaces with the "D Pad" as well, making flying helocopters much more chalenging, amung other changes with the controls, for both land and air (including UAV). No sea vehicles in this demo."

I wanna remove this section because it poorly written, it addresses the reader directly (you), and it's basically just some guy's analysis of the demo. Policy concerns: WP:OR, WP:GAMEGUIDE, and WP:GAMECRUFT. The section is like a gaping, bleeding hole and I'm not the only one who had the decency to remove it.

Next, "Limited Edition" section - Should be cut down as I did in my recent edit. Mentioning that it provides bonuses such as weapons should be enough, instead of going into every single detail.

Next, the "additional information" section: Inappropriate since it's not wikipedia's job to provide tech support.

Eik Corell (talk) 18:46, 29 January 2010 (UTC) E[reply]

Good job on removing that large section, words like 'unfortunately' don't fit an article on wikipedia. 81.68.255.36 (talk) 13:58, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No reception section yet

I am aware that GameInformer reviewed this game in their latest issue, giving it a 9.5 out of 10. Still, I think we should hold off on making a "Reception" section until more critics get their hands on a review copy. Link 486 (talk) 12:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC) The reception section could mention the 3.5 million demo downloads it got, or the response to the betas or demos. Jayrossss (talk) 00:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone format a reception section? Once the layout is set I can add all of the info, thanks, Jayrossss (talk) 05:04, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Demo

Even though it's just a demo..doesn't battlefield work with this EA account and all? Does that mean that progress in the demo carries over through such an EA account to the full game? 81.68.255.36 (talk) 13:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Prologue takes place in WWII

According to the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) Bad Company 2's prologue takes place in WWII. "In single-player mode, players conduct missions on an unnamed Japanese island during World War II and then move into the modern day through jungles, deserts, and snowy terrain."

I have edited the single-player section to represent this. If you do not believe this should be included in the article, please discuss, instead of just editing and inserting false information. Jayrossss (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TBH I think that we should wait until the game comes out before we put that info in. i'm not going to edit but I'll just put in Citation needed. LtFury (talk) 00:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Jayrossss (talk) 23:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be removed. Granted, what counts is verifiability, but I don't think the ESRB qualify as a reliable source in this case. Eik Corell (talk) 23:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I read the ESRB article, and I am certain that they constitute a reliable source, more so than a videogame website or the likes. I encourage you to find a source that discusses the game's prologue so that we can edit that section with "accurate" information. Jayrossss (talk) 19:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Received the game this morning, and I can verify that the prologue is set on an unnamed island during some sort of failed operation. You can take my word for it, or you can wait for a reliable source to confirm. Ericleb01 (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Engine

I am fairly sure this game uses Frostbite 1.5 for consoles and PC. Someone changed it to Frostbite 1.5 for PC, and Frostbite 2.0 for consoles, which is fairly illogical and is not cited. Jayrossss (talk) 23:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

your thinking about 1943 LtFury(talk) 03:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am thinking about Bad Company 2. I cited a source that says BC2 uses Frostbite 1.5, that source was actually an official blog post by the lead programmer from DICE.Jayrossss (talk) 19:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok well the game is running on a highly modified version of that engine my ref calls it 1.x maybe they is the 1.5 engine but then again I maybe think of Destruction 2.0 LtFury(talk) 19:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

if anyone bothered to play the demo. if a building collapsed on someone it'll say destruction 2.0. and in a interview with one of the developers it says its running on frostbite 2.0 it was battlefield 1943 running on 1.5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.62.253.160 (talk) 17:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are mistaken, it is frostbite 1.5. Please cite your source that it is frostbite 2.0... Jayrossss (talk) 18:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

now thinking about it maybe Bf1943 was running on a lower version of 1.5. still needs to be looked in to LtFury(talk) 01:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Along with Battlefield Vietnam, Bad Company 2 is one of only two games in the Battlefield series to have blood

didn't battlefield 2 have blood? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.105.230.131 (talk) 13:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it did not. I just played to check. Ericleb01 (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

South African Release

EA South Africa was apparently shocked to find that two major retailers, CNA and BT Games, had broken the international release date by one day. Due to this most South Africans actually got the game on the 4th March and local game server providers SGS and iGame launched their servers on the 4th too. The Do gaming article [1] - werner_ghost —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.246.51.104 (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Time travelling

"On March 30, 2010, Electronic Arts announced the first downloadable content for Battlefield Bad Company 2."

That date has not occured yet. 69.120.147.64 (talk) 03:27, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


start up "troubles"

should there not a be a section detailing the troubles the game haves ?? like not able to connect and just now the punkbuster problems ????? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goakiller900 (talkcontribs) 20:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, not unless this problem is covered by a reliable source. All the attempts to add it have been either unsourced or just stupid rantings from angry players. Eik Corell (talk) 20:53, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dont you think the sheer number of people complaining of this problem makes it a reliable source? Its no secret that for most of the game's first weekend it was unplayable why do we need someone "official" to say so? And even if we do I think EA's blogs and tweets on the subject would serve as a reliable source. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stupidknowledge24 (talkcontribs) 21:44, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Admins on the official Battlefield BC2 forum have made posts concerning these problems, which I believe should serve as a reliable source. Moreover, the ticker that scrolls at the bottom of the main menu addresses the Punkblocker issues (also a reliable source). As for how wide spread the problems are; the main server which verifies a player's account information went down for the Xbox 360, PS3 and PC on March 6, 2010. This means that everyone attempting to play the game at this time was affected. (That's about as widespread a bug concerning the online component of a video game can get) Regards -BOB