What's the better game? BF2 or BF2142?

OpenToSuggestions · 7 Mar 2011 at 12:07

BF2>>>>BF2142

BF2 is not a grenade fest on 64 players at all! (Infantry only it is though).
BF2142 is good, very good, but when I played it again around a year ago it was full of batty boys c4 bunny hopping so I went back to BF2. Obviously I am now into BC2 but BF2 has been a great game, just a little dated now

.

That said, Titan mode is brilliant. I would have to pick BF2 though still...

Kosmiche · 7 Mar 2011 at 12:30

BF2 for me personally, its hard to find a server with good mods that clamp down on vulching. Vulching ruins the game for me.

Participant · 7 Mar 2011 at 12:42

Desert Combat > *

.

petemyster · 7 Mar 2011 at 12:45

bJN said:
BF2 is the better game, but I preferred 2142 if I was playing by myself rather than with people on comms. 2142 had slightly better physics and the bullet reg was a lot better

This. BF2 it is so boring to do infantry combat because of the bullet reg, you literally can't hit a thing it is so off.

BF2 has better settings and vehicles, but the infantry combat is just too bad.

Clum · 7 Mar 2011 at 12:55

BF2. It just doesn't get old for me. Years later I'm still playing it regularly, which is more than I can say for any other game of it's era.

Kosmiche · 7 Mar 2011 at 13:01

Is it not testament to how good bf2 is that the bullet reg is so bad but so many people used to or still play it?

And isnt that reason enough for it being the better game?

Casdawer · 7 Mar 2011 at 13:05

Had more fun moments on BF2, so will say BF2.

Enjoyed 2142 to a lot though.

Rezident · 7 Mar 2011 at 13:15

BF2 is so much bigger and better and just felt more realistic.

phil675 · 7 Mar 2011 at 15:47

Both different games, BF2142 is much more cut down and the weapons are all a bit unrealistic. I have good fun with both but 2142 is more for a quick blast. BF2 has a much better scale.

Kosmiche · 7 Mar 2011 at 16:26

Unrealistic fictional weapons. Who wouldve thunk it.

4T5 · 7 Mar 2011 at 16:34

BF2.
I've played it daily since day of release & no other game I've ever played has gotten so many of my hours.

'Wes · 7 Mar 2011 at 16:36

phil675 said:
Both different games, BF2142 is much more cut down and the weapons are all a bit unrealistic.

Of course it is, it's a game produced with futuristic warfare that isn't even around today.

jaws104 · 7 Mar 2011 at 18:05

Haven't played in years but as mentioned above the balance in 2142 was excellent, bullet reg was great. Old clan ran an inf only server (INF-UK), camp gibralter most of the time and played in a few leagues too. Good times

AMDPower · 7 Mar 2011 at 18:33

Is it not testament to how good bf2 is that the bullet reg is so bad but so many people used to or still play it?

And isnt that reason enough for it being the better game?

I played Battle field bad company on my brothers pc, just no challenge. Put the cursor on enemy and shoot and his down.

BF2 the shooting physics are bad but that is the challenge, you can stand in front of someone and empty a whole clip and they don't die, by adapting the shooting methods u can get much better.

Just love the game, i don't care uuber gfx or realism but good game play.

its great game but it will take moths to get used to its shoddy physics, its not one of those you just pick up and love.

Strife212 · 7 Mar 2011 at 18:43

Both are great, better than the modern ones.

magicoi · 7 Mar 2011 at 20:25

jaws104 said:
Haven't played in years but as mentioned above the balance in 2142 was excellent, bullet reg was great. Old clan ran an inf only server (INF-UK), camp gibralter most of the time and played in a few leagues too. Good times

was in INF-UK for a bit myself - crossland, ezekiel and bond are the names i remember (few years back now), then it all changed to veritas gaming and they went COD

Good guys, damn good players too.

2142 has had huge time from me over a few soldiers, 2 to Brig Gen, loved it!
i liked BF2 but unbalanced jets, dolphon diving and shocking hit reg meant i didnt persevere. Played it after 2142 too and dont really get the hye from the BF2 fanboys. Good game tho, just not as good as 2142 for me.

jaws104 · 7 Mar 2011 at 22:36

magicoi said:
was in INF-UK for a bit myself - crossland, ezekiel and bond are the names i remember (few years back now), then it all changed to veritas gaming and they went COD
Good guys, damn good players too.

2142 has had huge time from me over a few soldiers, 2 to Brig Gen, loved it!
i liked BF2 but unbalanced jets, dolphon diving and shocking hit reg meant i didnt persevere. Played it after 2142 too and dont really get the hye from the BF2 fanboys. Good game tho, just not as good as 2142 for me.

Yeah

i packed it in when they moved to COD, my dude was Alpha1.1 btw

PapaLazaru · 7 Mar 2011 at 22:38

4T5 said:
BF2.
I've played it daily since day of release & no other game I've ever played has gotten so many of my hours.

Agreed. http://bf2s.com/player/43685047/

Though my stats pale into insignificance to this! http://bf2s.com/player/82998931/ :eek:

*edit*

Must be a dirty padder.

Amos91 · 8 Mar 2011 at 01:04

BF2 for me. I liked the principle of Titan mode in 2142 but it often ended with a stalemate inside the titan which for me eventually got boring. Also BF2 is 'more believable' for me because of the use of known weapons and equipment.

Thats why I have spent about 450 hours on bf2 and only 95 on bf2152

MissChief · 8 Mar 2011 at 03:44

If you end up with a stalemate in the Titan, just go for silos. more than one way to win @2142! Lost count of the number of times an opposition team has retreated into the titan as soon as the shields dropped and we just capped and kept the silos for an easy win. Works even better if you have a few guys who keep heading into the titan to keep em busy.