Originally Posted by Zero4549
We did, for about a year. All the fanbois just keep flaming anyone who speaks up about something.
As for those graphics and physics? what physics? A couple chunks of falling walls that magically vanish as soon as they touch the ground? Even BC2 outdid that. The graphics? That's subjective, many would argue that said blue tint makes those graphics terrible.
At any rate, it's everyone's choice if they like the game, but it's pretty hard not to admit that regardless of anyone's personal preferences, EA/DICE is showing a worrying trend.
Most people just used team-speak in BF2, 2142, and BF3. I don't know how many people used it in BC2, though, since I didn't find as many team players as I did in the past and BF3.
As for destruction and physics.. BF3 has a lot more small pieces of destructible objects and if it were all to stay on screen, it would cause massive amounts of lag. BC2 simply turned buildings into static objects after they were destroyed and it had far less debris flying off. Also, the BF3 debris doesn't disappear right away like you say, depending on the settings I believe.
I won't comment on this so called worrying trend.
Originally Posted by twitchyzero
^ sure the debris disappears when they fall to the ground...maybe that was in consideration to messing with vehicular play but that didn't answer the question...which other game out there can match both physics AND graphics of bf3.
I'd say BC2's FB1.5 engine's destruction is slightly worse than BF3's...but the graphics is no match.
The only gripe I have with BF3's physics is the lack of the ability to blow bridges up.
That's one feature I wish we would see in BF3. Although, apparently Aftermath is supposed to have some strategic destructible set pieces.