Why play IO? You can go on absurdly long kill streaks without eventually being artied by some retarded 11 year old or gunned down by a tank that is three blocks away and spamming its main turret on the wall near somebody you were about to revive.
Vehicles introduce a significantly large amount of randomness to the game because so many kills (by vehicles) only happen because of the inherent advantages of vehicles. A normal battlefield scoreboard is extremely misleading because some people with the top scores ONLY have their score because they had access to a specific vehicle. And half of the people at the server could probably have the same score if only they were in that vehicle (choppers and jets on wake anybody? armor on karkand or mashtuur?) They might be in first with the vehicle, but without it, they might have been very average. Playing in vehicle servers can be miserable when your team descends into TK battles over who flies the untouchable beast vehicle. IO scoreboards tend to be more legitimate comparisons because everybody on the board is using similar weapons, has similar health characteristics, and nobody is being stalked with arty and cartillery.
Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
is it just me, or are 3/4 of the posters in this thread missing the point of the Battlefield series?
The point of battlefield 2 is making money for EA by way of providing us, the consumers, with entertainment. BF2 is especially fun because of gameplay options. You can use 7 kits or ~5 different vehics on ~13 maps! these options are a testament to EAs intention for people to use the game how they want and find unique ways of enjoying it. The result is that the BF2 community can hold a wide variety of people, from tank sim people, to RTS people, to CS people, to flightsim people. This achieves EAs goal. IO just ensures that BF2 caters to the enormous community of people who love running around fighting infantry battles. Dont get me wrong, most people think the vehicles are awesome, but sometimes their advantages are the only thing spoiling an otherwise perfect infantry round so there are tons of people that also find it fun to have strictly infantry competitions.
Now if by "the point of the battlefield series" you meant "what i like about the battlefield series" then i understand why u are talking. but that doesnt make it worth listening to. what if i declared the point of the battlefield series is having people like you come on servers so i can kill you like 20 times.
In competitive BF2 (like CAL) there has almost always been infantry only in the form of 5v5 ladders, etc. Do the IO haters think these players are skilless statpadders? no, of course not. the winners of these ladders are some of the best players in the game, and the reason they compete without vehicles is because it is accepted that infantry skill is not accurately judged when infantry is tasked with destroying or avoiding vehicles. IO is just a separate realm of competition. Sure it is more difficult to succeed as infantry outside of IO, but it is also more difficult for drivers to succeed if they play some IO. The game modes require different skills and strategies in order to win (and there are still only 3 medals to give out).
Last edited by Marinejuana (2006-12-04 10:49:00)
