Poll

What should up-and-coming Battlefields cover?

Sci-Fi Conflict0%0% - 0
Korean Conflict (1960's)0%0% - 0
Fictitious African Conflict22%22% - 2
Fictitious Balkan Conflict0%0% - 0
Modern Conflict Theory w/ dynamic emphasis77%77% - 7
Total: 9
Kniero
Banned
+1|7198|AZ
IMHO, the Battlefield saga should never go sci-fi and should never go pre-WWII -- it should merely continue, as time passes, covering modern warfare in a manner more dynamic and thorough each time. To me, this mainly means that the environment be more interactive. Soldiers should be able to enter all buildings on the map, dig out trenches for cover, utilize a hand-to-hand combat system, master CQC with minor tools (the knife), control exposure (relative to their "cover"), and eventually destroy/erode the architecture around them to some degree. Hey, if at the end of the round there remains nothing but heaps of dirt and piles of concrete and steel rubble, all the more immersed and captivated the player will be.

- Kniero

(P.S. Also, an actual array of vehicular transports would be included in my version of a this "new, interactive take on the Battlefield series" as I'd like to call it . That, and further weapon/soldier customization.)

Last edited by Kniero (2006-03-14 04:52:19)

rustynutz
I am British!
+124|7134|England and damn proud
i hear ya mate going sci fi is a bad idea it should be modernday warfare which needs teamwork not fucking huge ass ugly mech's which can eliminate every thing!
i say set it in about 2015 and add a few more guns and a few more vehicles and  BIGGER maps, cause when u get in a plane, out of bounds, u will be punished!
a selection of vehicles would be cool, so instead the abrams get a challenger 2 or some thing else, with heli's get little birds and chinooks, with apache's commanches and the rest, and same with planes MORE planes.
theres my
  $0.02
TriggerHappy998
just nothing
+387|7299|-
Search please, this topic has been thoroughly covered.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard