This week marks the tenth year anniversary of a fantastic Battlefield game landing on Xbox 360.
Battlefield 2: Modern Combat, while more of a spin-off from the main series, introduced the Battlefield brand of combat so familiar to PC players to an eager console market.
It’s often overshadowed by the much more successful (and similarly titled) Modern Warfare thread of the Call of Duty series. But it really shouldn’t be.
Here are six reasons why Modern Combat defeats Modern Warfare.
Paul writes: "The game I'm looking at today, Battlefield 2: Modern Combat, was the first title in the series to be released on consoles, initially appearing on PS2 and the OG Xbox back in 2005. The version we are concerned with today was an enhanced version of the game released back in 2006 on the Xbox 360."
Remember playing this with my mate, switching to Paratroopers in-flight while Trivium's cover of Master of Puppets was blasting lmao.
The ability to switch units at anytime was a pretty interesting singleplayer mechanic that I thought we would see more of, but it never really caught on. I guess maybe the recent Watch Dogs Legion had something similar, although I didn't play it.
Good observation. Yes, it gave singleplayer a more tactical feel due to the scale. I suppose at that time, with the rise of online multiplayer in the console space, minds were more set on developing new multiplayer experiences.
We had a game on PC with a similar mechanic called "Wargasm". (yes, that was it's actual name, haha). Combined Infantry, Tank, APC & Helicopter combat, controllable from a map like an RTS, but with the ability to jump in directly and fight FPS/TPS style.
It was pretty cool at the time. More "Arcadey" than Battlefield became.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
OPM: Nostalgia time as we look back at the PlayStation origins of some of PS4′s biggest games. From FIFA to Need To Speed, Metal Gear to Final Fantasy. My how they’ve grown.
Replies(1)
El33tonline writes:
"Every year (and every few months), EA shuts down online server support for a selection (and in same cases, an entire crop) of its games to make way for the support of future online-enabled titles, ostensibly to provide better features and support for the new blood.
Last year, the biggest shock was the discontinuation of server support for EA’s Lord of the Rings: Battle for Middle-earth strategy games, and this year the list of games set to be without official online features includes games from the Battlefield, Need For Speed and Tiger Woods franchises, amongst others."
I wonder if their doing this for the coming of BF3... The servers of the August shutdown would go towards BF3 Beta servers, while the October shutdowns would go towards the launch for extra BF3 servers.
I bet EA can shut down the BF3 servers in one year and make everyone buy a new BF every year. Ha! I don't think people realize that if EA was in Activision's place with COD, they would be just as as bad. EA has a history of making stupid DLC and charging money for it, etc. People seem to quickly forget that, IDK why. So it wouldn't suprise me that if EA had COD, they'd be making $15 map packs left and right.
@Bnet
Lesser of two evils.
I just hope they don't shut down the BC2 servers any time soon.
This is why it sucks that most games are strongly online based this gen and single player taking a backseat. when these games are a few years old, they're pretty much gonna be worthless because the servers are most likely gonna be down.
Or maybe because it's not worth it to keep servers online for a 5 year old console-only game that nobody (Ok maybe 50 or 60 people) is playing.
You're upset that you can't play Battlefield 2: Modern Combat? You know there's dozens of better games to be playing?
Or are you mad anout the BF 2142 demo? Really? Anybody who's still playing the demo at this point has gotten more than their money's worth. If they want to play more 2142, they can buy the damned game
I think you just hate EA.
Funny how people cheer for some corporations and rally against others. In reality, there is NO such thing as a corporation that "cares". Corporations do not feel anything, and as a whole, their one and only goal is to improve their bottom line. Deal with it.
EA isn't the biggest dog and they have done all sorts of BS. Introducing online pass, shutting down servers and etc.
Activision still offers online free play with NO PASS needed, and yet to shut down any servers.
LOL, I remember that they had shutdown Madden titles that were less than 2 years old.
my issue here is not with old games having servers shut down... but with games like Madden 10. Hardly old, and support is being dropped. Meanwhile, they keep pumping out new versions every year for us to buy at 60$ a pop.
I recently just sold my copy of Battlefield: MC and did a test run of the online play prior to releasing the game. I found it was still populated and fun on the 360. I guess you still have your diehard fans playing games.
I wonder too if EA servers going down will mean that xbox 360 servers will not be available for the game?
I know MS shut down pre-xbox 360 server connection due to limitations of old games against new server upgrades needed. But I have yet to see any current generation games become non-playable. But there must be some out there... anyone know which titles are no longer playable due to servers being removed on xbox 360? Or PS3 for that matter?
Hmm... Battlefield 2 will still have operational servers. Why is this?
Not saying its bad. Just wondering why all these games have server shutdowns and older games still have servers up with no intention of ever shutting them down. Why isn't every game like that?
WTF EA...wtf is wrong with yall? Sony still has servers up on their ps2 games! Back in the year 2000 even!
Agree or Disagree if you Agree that EA is a problem in the gaming industry!
I understand their decision (for some of those games). I don't know anyone who still plays (or EVER played) most of those titles.
Isn't Battlefield 2 still a very popular online game, though? There's no way it's in the 1%.
A lot of those aren't Sony's servers. Many of them are Gamespys or even people's personal servers. EA uses their own servers for their games though.
Do you people expect EA to operate online servers for every online game they have ever made?
They are a business after all, and if operating a plethora of servers is hurting them, then why should they continue? The idea is ludicrous.
Maybe not ever made, but Madden 10 and Tiger 10 aren't all that old.
EA hosts their own servers so they can be greedy and charge anyone who doesn't buy new $10, and then shuts them down two years later.
After they shut down their own server support, why can't they enable P2P? That's what Activision has, and that's why I don't buy any EA online games. .. Ever. If I like a game, I go back to it every few months.
"But as games get replaced with newer titles, the number of players still enjoying the older games dwindles below a point—fewer than 1% of all peak online players across all EA titles—where it’s feasible to continue the behind-the-scenes work involved with keeping these games up and running."
...so why is it then EA are the only company with this issue? another load of crap from EA +
also, Maddn NFL 10? A bit soon for that don't you think EA? Seeing as Madden 11 is the only one next to that atm
This is why companies should make games with both, dedicated and p2p. Or patch the game with p2p before they are gonna shut down the servers
Servers cost alot money, and take alot of room when you have a libary of servers its very difficult to keep everygame running. When you have a company that chucks out games on market alot more than most others.
They cant please everyone. Not forgetting the maintanance.
At least they chooseing to host there servers not take the cheap way out.
It's great they host their own servers, but then they shut them down a couple years later. I agree with Dantes, they should patch it to allow P2P, so at least it can still be usable.
I could understand if they only removed support for games with dedicated servers, even then the decent thing would be to release server software, which I still wouldn't blame if they didn't. But removing support for peer to peer games, that's blasphemy. I'm guessing Madden was peer to peer. In a peer to peer game, the online servers only let players join each other, just act as a meeting place, and I think even IRC chat servers have quite load more than such servers.
Konami pulled the same thing too. I had bought a 2 year old PES, as I liked its gameplay better. They shut the servers 3 months later, claiming to open space for new titles. That was utter bullshit: the servers were just a meeting place for players. Players sent invitations to other players, or random matches were arranged. A basic irc server can support thousands of channels. A single peer 2 peer control server should be able to support dozens / hundreds of such "no longer popular" games, if not more.
No biggie, the PC community will make its own servers. For all the consolers, yes this is gay.
Hard to believe the BF:2142 demo servers are still full everyday. I remember trying it out WAYYY back in 2006 XD. It's a great game though, even the demo!
The servers for BF2MC have been up since 2005... its not financially feasible for them to continue to keep servers for that game especially when there have been so many new BF games released since then.
So what... If ppl are still playing it leave it alone or just use live servers or psn don't use it as a tool to cut ppl off in hopes that they will buy the latest game. So that they don't have to maintain them them selves. Unless I'm wrong and they still have to maintain them?
because they want you to buy the up and coming games this fall...
Although publishers these days are finding ways to do that, through DLC and passess and pre-order bonuses and shit...
No, i mean they cut out the SP parts and re sell them to you through DLC and Bonuses and shit like that, not turning off, but cutting away at it
single player is where its at and where i have the most fun. I only play online when i am really interested in something AKA KZ2-3 and resistance 2 CO-OP.
and i think EA must have done some research to see if enough people were playing these games to leave the servers up.
sports games in general die out after the next one comes out just like COD
I sank way too many hours into this game. I am surprised none of these maps were remade in latter Battlefield titles.
Loved it, I've only played ps2 version though lol but still it felt somewhat revolutionary to me. The scale, classes, equipment available were mind boggling, that and you could use tanks plus helis which felt quite authentic. Yet MW is still better. More game modes, customization plus an epic campaign nuff said.
Played both the Xbox and Xbox 360. Remember the jump from the two and being wow'd.
Better days of gaming.