Bad Company=best warfare fps?

[Anung Un Rama]

Im not trying to start some kind of hideously messy flame war, but I honestly think that Battlefield Bad Company is a far better warfare fps simply because in COD (which is clearly the main competitor) people just run off on their own, as if they are some mix between chuck norris and rambo whereas in Bad Company, sticking with youre squad is actually a very good idea.

Im not saying COD is bad, i just think it rewards playing for yourself rather than as a team (as Bad Company rewards you for helping teammates)

Whats more, the vehicles and support moves (like guided missiles and mortar strikes simulate a more realistic military engagement)

Feel free to destroy my argument with superior reason and evidence as this is just my opinion.

[dsmiles]

Haven't played it, but it sounds good.

[Anung Un Rama]

Grossly underrated in my opinion and the class system, although rigid was very well balanced and all had advantages over the others in certain situations.

Besides, there's nothing quite like sprinting up to a tank, throwing a C4 charge onto it, running away and then blowing it to smithereens.

[warty goblin]

The sequel will have fully destructable buildings. That alone makes it a staggering improvement.

[Anung Un Rama]

and the destructibility in the first one was pretty awesome too, not to mention customizeable classes :)

[EleventhHour]

I'd say it's mostly just a funnier, more playable version of Battlefield 2. (Holy crap do the Stimm-sticks make the rifleman a more viable class.)
Probably why it's called Battlefield : Bad Company. :smalltongue: