DICE: Battlefield Heroes is not Battlefield 3.

a lot of people were worried that this was gonna be the next Battlefield game, DICE released a Q/A sheet to fansittes saying that it is not Battlefield 3.[URL]http://www.totalgamingnetwork.com/bf2.php[/URL] just in case some of you were worried.DICE: Battlefield Heroes is not Battlefield 3.
I'd never even heard of Heroes, so no worries on my part.DICE: Battlefield Heroes is not Battlefield 3.
Lol if Battlefiled heroes was Battlefield 3, I'd blow up the DICE headquaters. But its pretty obviously not so keep up the good work DICE!
[QUOTE=''JP_Russell'']I'd never even heard of Heroes, so no worries on my part.[/QUOTE]think TF2 + BF1942, but as a free, add supported game and you get BF: Heroes.
I think whe still need BF3.
[QUOTE=''thusaha'']I think whe still need BF3.[/QUOTE]PC gamer already ran an article on it...so its coming.
Battlefield heroes was just recently announced (today I think) and so far all i know is that it's free and it's got cartoony graphics (well like team fortress 2)
That is good news.
What ever happened to that single-player focused battlefield game with full destructible environments? Bad Company was it called?
[QUOTE=''Buffalo_Soulja'']What ever happened to that single-player focused battlefield game with full destructible environments? Bad Company was it called?[/QUOTE]thats for consoles only, BF3 on the PC is said to be using the same game engine though.
Yes they are still making Bad Company. Anyone else agree that they are now starting to just milk the BF franchise. They need to go either back to Vietnam and do it the right way, or just give ti better advertising so people know it exists, or they need to go back to WWII, which I think people have been asking for since the BF2. OR they need to go even further into the future, such as the year 2142, when technology has increased even more than in the game Battlefield 2142. Yes that was sarcasm. They could have made an easy fix by calling it Battlefield 2042, then it wouldn't seem like technological progress had halted for 100 years until the game period. Anyway, if all else fails they should go to WWI and end the series, but going back to modern day is so generic, as modern day for video games is the new WWII, everyone has abandoned WWII games and moved on to that WAY unique setting in the modern age. Have there ever even been any games EVER about WWI?
They need a Battlefield Cave Man next..
[QUOTE=''Armalite1016'']Yes they are still making Bad Company. Anyone else agree that they are now starting to just milk the BF franchise. They need to go either back to Vietnam and do it the right way, or just give ti better advertising so people know it exists, or they need to go back to WWII, which I think people have been asking for since the BF2. OR they need to go even further into the future, such as the year 2142, when technology has increased even more than in the game Battlefield 2142. Yes that was sarcasm. They could have made an easy fix by calling it Battlefield 2042, then it wouldn't seem like technological progress had halted for 100 years until the game period. Anyway, if all else fails they should go to WWI and end the series, but going back to modern day is so generic, as modern day for video games is the new WWII, everyone has abandoned WWII games and moved on to that WAY unique setting in the modern age. Have there ever even been any games EVER about WWI?[/QUOTE]WW1 doesnt work in a game, its just due to the nature of that War...its almost all trenchwarefare.I think its fine the way it is. As a lot of BF mods show us, their is still plenty of ways for the series to grow.
[QUOTE=''AngelB1ack'']They need a Battlefield Cave Man next..[/QUOTE]LMAO!Wait... I'd buy that :x
[QUOTE=''Armalite1016'']Have there ever even been any games EVER about WWI?[/QUOTE]Yeah but most of them are DOS flight sims.
[QUOTE=''cobrax75''] [QUOTE=''Armalite1016'']Yes they are still making Bad Company. Anyone else agree that they are now starting to just milk the BF franchise. They need to go either back to Vietnam and do it the right way, or just give ti better advertising so people know it exists, or they need to go back to WWII, which I think people have been asking for since the BF2. OR they need to go even further into the future, such as the year 2142, when technology has increased even more than in the game Battlefield 2142. Yes that was sarcasm. They could have made an easy fix by calling it Battlefield 2042, then it wouldn't seem like technological progress had halted for 100 years until the game period. Anyway, if all else fails they should go to WWI and end the series, but going back to modern day is so generic, as modern day for video games is the new WWII, everyone has abandoned WWII games and moved on to that WAY unique setting in the modern age. Have there ever even been any games EVER about WWI?[/QUOTE] WW1 doesnt work in a game, its just due to the nature of that War...its almost all trenchwarefare.[/QUOTE]Not to mention the fact that there are hardly any automatic weapons, all portable weapons were bolt-action rifles and whatnot. The lack of variety in weaponry would make for a rather dull experience, to be quite honest.
[QUOTE=''JP_Russell''][QUOTE=''cobrax75''] [QUOTE=''Armalite1016'']Yes they are still making Bad Company. Anyone else agree that they are now starting to just milk the BF franchise. They need to go either back to Vietnam and do it the right way, or just give ti better advertising so people know it exists, or they need to go back to WWII, which I think people have been asking for since the BF2. OR they need to go even further into the future, such as the year 2142, when technology has increased even more than in the game Battlefield 2142. Yes that was sarcasm. They could have made an easy fix by calling it Battlefield 2042, then it wouldn't seem like technological progress had halted for 100 years until the game period. Anyway, if all else fails they should go to WWI and end the series, but going back to modern day is so generic, as modern day for video games is the new WWII, everyone has abandoned WWII games and moved on to that WAY unique setting in the modern age. Have there ever even been any games EVER about WWI?[/QUOTE]WW1 doesnt work in a game, its just due to the nature of that War...its almost all trenchwarefare.[/QUOTE]Not to mention the fact that there are hardly any automatic weapons, all portable weapons were bolt-action rifles and whatnot. The lack of variety in weaponry would make for a rather dull experience, to be quite honest.[/QUOTE]It would be a hoot to play a game like that or even a Civil War shooter since us gamers who are getting older don't have the reflexes like we used to :DThey are milking the franchise, but I really liked playing 2142 over BF2 and I didn't like BF:V at all. My only complaint is they fracture online play by putting out so many sequels and expansions so close together and then not really patching them after so long.