Well as true as that may be, there are plenty of reasons to think that one is superior to the other. Some people prioritize ease of use and big comfy couches, some people like the control, freedom, and features that generally come with the PC. Ultimately, all that matters to me is that my PC games still feel like PC games.. and ironically.. DICE is doing more to ensure that a console port does that over what IW is doing for a franchise born on PC's. The fact that they're giving this port so much love is the entire reason I'm beginning to show interest in the franchise. It should hold me over 'til a proper BF3 hits.

We already know that DICE is working on BF3, and I still suspect it will be a PC exclusive. Bad Company is big enough to carry the franchise on consoles by its lonesome.

And even if that were true (and it's probably not), it's not the console market that's too big to allow it, it's DICE. That's why indies are going to continue to play such an important roll on the PC in the immediate future. We'll have to look to projects like Natural Selection 2 for real innovation. It's the indy market that is going to provide the most high quality exclusives, and those are the games that will play most directly to the platforms strengths. Not that multiplatform titles aren't going to continue to be important as well.. we still have the mostly-PC-first Valve providing stellar PC games, despite releasing them on multiple platforms.. and I still have faith in id, despite being mostly console-first.

I still have a moderate amount of faith in DICE too. EA and DICE have been down the road that IW is traveling already, and they know what works for them and what doesn't. Plus, they've been showing us a lot of theoretically love lately. Granted, they've put themselves in a pretty great position with PC gamers. We've basically been content starved for the last four years so far as DICE is concerned, so we're going to devour pretty much any thing they give us.

On the other hand, Activision has the ace up their sleeve with Blizzard. If they want to make a power grab in the Windows gaming market, not much if anything can really hold them back.

Thankfully they're not all we have left to count on. Long live indy gaming! And Valve (who despite being giants, are technically independent)!

Yup. After reading about all the additional love they're giving the PC port, I'm willing to give it a chance. And for the record, I even said months ago that I was considering picking this up.. I've been on the fence ever since.. and Activision pushed me over. So far as "giving up gaming" goes -- that's not going to happen because of two franchises, even if they do dominate my gaming history. I've only given up on Call of Duty.

I just love how every concern and complaint that gamers (read:consumers) have is considered whining in this age. It's sorta pathetic how brainwashed people are. Publishers own your asses, yet, we pay for everything. The general attitude seems to be, "shut up and pay." The consumer's own influence goes beyond buy-or-don't-buy. Don't kid yourselves.

That is all. Plus, I still have Call of Duty 4 and BF2, right?

That's one difficult wall of text to read, but let me address what I got out of it.. mostly concerning Modern Warfare 2:

Call of Duty is immensely successful, and immensely profitable. They are already making more than enough money to support their budgets. I'm not even against them trying to create a bigger revenue stream.. but that's not really the issue that PC gamers have with Modern Warfare at all. The issue is that it's a power grab, and it's sacrificing features as a result. No one is against match making. Most people aren't even against them trying to make more money. This isn't an ease of use issue, it's about controlling content. They could have achieved their goals without tossing mods and dedicated servers out the window. It really is that simple.

I would gladly pay an extra $10-20 (over the $10 price hike we're already seeing) for mod and dedicated server support. They could sell the mod tools, or the ability to play mods! They could sell the dedicated server software.. there are other ways to milk our wallets. And this is actually an investment on their behalf. Running IWNet is going to cost them more, it cost them more to take out dedicated servers.. but then again, it's in the pursuit of making more money.

Survive the recession? Seriously? You think that's a big issue for Activision and Infinity Ward? There are no more "proper" sequels in store for us for Call of Duty. If MW2 continues to be successful, and it will, they'll continue to tread down this path. They don't care about their PC fanbase at all. They've made that pretty clear.

But back on topic for a moment: DICE isn't letting me down. They've taken an entirely new approach to dealing with their original fans--they've starved us. We're so hungry that we'll eat up pretty much anything they give us now :)

Plus, if you read zerk16's comments on EA's forums about the PC version of BC2.. it's music to the PC gamer's ears. It's beautiful! Just knowing the position they're taking with their ports is really promising. I just can't wait to see Battlefield 3, but Bad Company 2 is looking worlds better than the original, especially with the features they're adding to the PC release.

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_co...

Based on BFBC1, I don't think BFBC2 is an equal replacement for CoD4 MW2. SP is night and day and DICE MP games have had issues as a general rule and BFBC and MC2 were the worse BF games to date imo. 42, BF:V, BF2 are almost completely different games. I like BFBC but with no real progress in the SP, no 4 player coop, and not a true BF MP ... hmmm And gotta laugh, tossing the PC gamers the "prone" bone. How PC gaming has fallen.

As for gamers jumping on EA's BF series, lets not forget DC from Traume/Kaos and how that went down...

As for EA starving gamers from BF games, that isn't completely true. There was BFBC and BF1943 and before these BF2142. EA was fracturing their own install base. True, there hasn't been a true BF2 sequal but why would they release during the CoD4 heat wave? I know most PC gamers considered BFBC **** so I find it funny they are all excited now.

PC gamers are acting like the guy who dumped a chick (EA/BF) because there was a hot chick (CoD4) he liked better and, you know, the old chick (EA) was kind of controlling, pretty devisive, and was all into money over you. So you got another hot chick (CoD4) to go out with him. The new chick decides they can keep going, but wants you to settle down and work into her life better (work, family, friends--you know, settle down, conform) and this means some of the special parts of the relationship she lied about. So dude ditches the chick (MW2). The ol' chick (EA) really hasn't changed, and is actually worse than the chick he just dumped (MW2), but the older chick (EA) throws out some pitty bones in the areas he was feeling cut off.

Oh yeah, we will give you mods and dedicted servers... with our consolized game that has poor SP, expansion pack mentality that kills communities, slow and poor patching, etc. Fewer gameplay modes, inferior infantry model, etc. Sure, she has some perks (destruction) and isn't all bad, but she is looking better than she is because you are just pissed off at what you lost.

PC gamers, Ace, PC gamers. We're the content starved. MC/BC1/1943 don't count.

All indications point to DICE giving the PC port of BC2 a lot of love, and it just looks much more feature rich (including the console versions) than its predecessor. I'm willing to give it a shot. It looks like it could be a solid game, and with the proper enhancements on the PC, it could be a lot more fulfilling than the port of 1943 stands to be. It may have an inferior infantry model than Call of Duty, but everything does, so it's going to be a while until our needs are properly addressed in that department. Until then, this looks like a nice hold-me-over. Just because I didn't like Bad Company (and yes, I've played it), it doesn't mean that the sequel might not be a different story.. especially if they really do give the port a proper amount of love and respect.

I'm certainly not as hyped for BC2 as I was originally for MW2, but I am anxiously anticipating it a whole lot more than I was prior to losing MW2. There's more hope on the horizon from indies too. Stuff like Natural Selection 2 has loads of promise.. and I'm personally hoping that KAOS learned a thing or two (or fifty) from FFOW, so that Homefront might actually bring the goods.

Also: we don't really care about single player.

Homefront is a conquest game, is it?

Btw, I thought FFOW was actually pretty good compared with BFBC. I think with some polish FFOW2 could be what we are all looking for really.

I'm pretty sure Homefront more or less is FFOW2, just with an actual story.

DICE continues to try to capitalize on Infinity Ward's folly.

dedicated servers faq: http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_co...

LOLZ. Talk about how DICE is playing this up. How soon we forget (posted this on B3D):DICE would be doing P2P too if they could. Does acts like they haven't ever "PR'd" (i.e. lied/mislead), said something was going to be released, and then not; never divided a community with booster packs; never ignored bugs while milking the community.

Give me a break.

This is pathetic.

How about this for DICE: You *really* want to impress us PC gamers? Release a BF game where

a. there aren't blatantly borked features out of the box
b. don't release a booster pack
c. continue support with monthly patches and free MP maps
d. have a community friendly approach to dedicated servers, mods, "unlocks", community servers, and full fledge mod tools released day one.

If you look how BF1942 and how the game was supported and compare it to the last BF franchises it is clear to see DICE/EA are the kettle calling the pot (IW/Activision) black.

How quickly PC gamers forget to hold EA to the fire for such STUPID stuff like their ranked servers and blacklisting unlocked servers, or their lack of support for dev tools, tardy/broken mod tools, etc.

First, BF2 > BF1942. Second, DICE's support may be shoddy, but they're still handling their expansion more gracefully than Infinity Ward has.

Oh, no! Booster packs! Srsly, Ace? No one fucking bought the booster packs anyway.. so it really didn't have much of an impact on the community. And trust me, people cried about them.. pretty f'n vocally.

In a bizarre way, EA/DICE's attempt at strong-arming their PC fans in the past is actually beneficial to their current image. The fact is, most of their efforts (The EA Store, booster pack integration, etc) failed. We don't expect them to fail again, at least, we want them to succeed. Believe it or not, PC gamers aren't afraid of paying for extra content. I believe that most hardcore PC gamers would actually pay a premium to hold on the value that we hold most dear: personal control.

Who the hell cares about DLC? We should be cheering on the first PC developer that actually figures out a way to deploy premium content without crapping all over their legacy features. Though one might question why the expansion pack model has witnessed such a dramatic decline in the FPS space, since it more-or-less already serves that very function.

Every major Battlefield release has been plagued with issues, and yes, some never get addressed.. but they've still delivered. Battlefield 2 1.0 was an incredible game, believe it or not.

At DICE's worst, they've been 10x better to their fan-base than Infinity Ward is being right now. But I guess when you say that mods aren't important to you and therefor don't really matter, I should expect that you'd have a skewed perspective on all of this. I mean come on... you're still holding DICE more accountable for ancient history than Infinity Ward? You're talking about stuff that happened, what, five+ years ago? And you're wondering why Infinity Ward is suffering for their current indiscretions? Come on.

I don't mean this as an insult.. but when you trivialize the impact of removing mods and dedicated servers from our games, and try to turn this back around on DICE.. I really think you must have lost some sort of perspective on PC gaming. These things are still vital to PC gamers, who skew more "hardcore" than the general gaming population. And while it's a niche, it does create a viable market for a lot of smaller indies.. and thank god for that. That's our future.

But we'll happily accept continued support from large publishers and developers as well. Ports are even acceptable, when they're done with the proper care and attention to the platform's needs.

So yes. DICE gets cake.

LOL.

You are so mad you cannot even respond straight son!

Look, I am all for mods. But mods, due to a number of factors (decline in the PC market, tools being unfriendly ::cough::DICE::cough::, escalating difficulty in creating mod content, higher expectation of communities due to past mod successes, etc) mods aren't being turned out at a fast pace, and good ones are much rarer than in the past. That is just a fact. Total conversions are really, really hard dude. Been there, done that. You are an artist, get in on it and see how it goes. The complexity on simple things like reloading a gun is really hard.

Did I think IW screwed up not supporting mods? Yes. Then again MW1 is essentially the same engine, cheaper, more accessible, etc so in one way IW could be seen as PRESERVING that community by not fragmenting across the MW2 launch. I don't see MW2 adding a lot technically that makes it more mod friendly. Infact I think a lot of where IW expanded would make it less mod friendly. Of course IW did it for the money--but IW based on the console sales could have pulled a DICE and totally not even given a MW2 games to the PC.

Yep, good ol' DICE. Where was BFBC on the PC? How about the delaaaaaaaaaayed BF1943? The PC sector has fiscal issues (don't put your head into denial) and DICE has clearly moved away from the PC market.

That is my point: DICE/EA have--both in the past as well as the very recently past--done exactly what you are slamming IW for.

The lack of dedicated servers is a big deal. Big. Of course the way DICE strong armed their own servers in BF2 was just as crappy. But you got used to it.I know quite a few people who bought them and it did cause problems for playing with friends. Halo 3 had the same issue.The numbers aren't flattering, don't kid yourself. The number of people who pirated CoD4 was pretty sickening.Actually DLC still isn't strong in PC shooters; what has happened in conjunction with the decline of PC sales (i.e. the consoles are substantially subsidizing PC development and PC development is a window into next gen) is that PC shooters have decidely shifted to online play. With online communities the hurdle of deploying new paid content is difficult. Especially if you are competing with free content (mods).Yeah, but you are so broken up over IW's nasty breakup letter you forget it was DICE pissing in your oatmeal last month.No, I just think you have a short memory concerning DICE.

And I didn't trivialize dedicated servers (biggest complaint about XBL).

And concerning mods the decline in mod activity, even more importantly mods that come to fruition while the game is still being plaid, is concerning. More so when you look at it from a company perspective that is subsidizing the PC release--"matchmaking" makes the game more accessible and DLC means you would/should get more content more often and of higher quality. I STILL don't like taking out mods (sheeesh) but then again the game isn't being canned (BFBC) or delayed forever (BF1943) and they actively have mod tools and ded servers on CoD4 which (a) has a bigger community and (b) established infra. I didn't play a single MW1 mod that was worth playing more than 10 minutes to be quite frank (mind you I wasn't in your ladder pro mod--which should stay on MW1 anyhow; same essential engine, and no reason to have to re-test the same engine to make the same changes again).

Yes, IW lied. BAD IW. IW would have been best off telling people from the get get. Further, while I DOUBT they ever thought this way, they could have presenting it as NOT wanting to harm the MW1 community and instead trying to target a broader online audiance with MW2. (I don't think that is the real reason mind you, before you go off).

But after playing BFBC I don't see the SP even being a match and CoD4 does have more robust MP options. Now you *know* I prefer conquest and BFBC2 is on my to buy list if it shapes up.

But really, this new kindled love affair I am seeing with DICE reminds me how short sighted PC gamers are. I mean, you modders are HACKERS according to DICE ... Yeah, DICE would never blacklist a non-ranked server for a mod, right ... oh wait, ours was. but this isn't DICE hate (I bought BFBC and 1943) but I think you lost perspective: This is a business.

And all of DICE's recent activity is simply PR. Crying COD4 fans: hook. line. sinker.

I still think you're missing perspective on this.

Your position on mods isn't completely misinformed, but I still think you're seeing this wrong. Yes, there are fewer and fewer total conversions--or at the very least there are fewer and fewer people playing them. They're still around, and still an important part of the PC experience, but never mind all of that, let's consider the rest of the mod space.

Every custom map, weapon, or tweak you've ever played in a PC game is a mod. I don't think you realize how important this is to people. Every PC release I've ever played has been enhanced by community support. Every one. That includes Battlefield and that includes Call of Duty. One only needs to look to source games to see just how commonly people actually play modded content. Left 4 Dead, Half Life, and Team Fortress 2 all have thriving mod communities whose efforts enhance those games for many people beyond their numbers. To say you haven't played a single COD4 mod worth ten minutes says everything.

You've suggested that you hadn't played a single COD4 mod you've enjoyed. May I suggest that you haven't been playing enough Call of Duty (or TF2 for that matter!) to know what you're missing.

And that's just on this one issue. The total lack of dedicated server support just compounds things tremendously. It's actually detrimental to PC communities and a deathblow to organized competition. The point is, these issues appear so much bigger (to me) than your complaints about DICE... some of which seem like a reach anyway... and most of them are seeded in history.

1943 was delayed forever? To make the PC version better.
Bad Company was canned? I'm totally unaware that it was even announced for the PC!

Has DICE screwed up? Sure.. but who hasn't? Right now matters to people. DICE's PR has been great, but its their actions that people will truly measure. So far they're playing their cards right and I don't see how you can fault people for liking what they have to say. If they deliver a worthy PC port, well, people are going to respond.

If they follow it up with some concrete information on Battlefield 3, then I think you can consider most sins forgiven.. with the less begrudging PC folk, at least.

PS. That second to last paragraph screams grudge. :P It's also a little ironic; I think parts of your positions on both mods and dedis are a little shortsighted too :P

Oh and while we're on about mods: I wish DICE could implement auto-downloading into their games. Call of Duty is basically perfect when it comes to mod implementation and deployment.. source too..

BF2.. not so much.

Now this is overboard...

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_co...

LOL!

Spoilers, duh ;)Doh. That doesn't sit well with me. Might be sitting this one out as well. The lack of a prone stance in 1943 drives me f'n crazy. I'm not back over the fence, but I'm definitely back on it.

I pray for a PC demo.