Quick bit of advice please.
I can get Battlefield 1942 + expansions or UO for roughly the same price (an Ayrton), anyone any opinion on which I should go for? Or as they're only £10 should I just get both?
Quick bit of advice please.
I can get Battlefield 1942 + expansions or UO for roughly the same price (an Ayrton), anyone any opinion on which I should go for? Or as they're only £10 should I just get both?
Well..
i would say COD:UO, purely because i really don't like the original battlefield.
BF1942 is great fun to play if you stick to vehicles, planes an whatever, but i hated the 'paper' feel that the weapons had, and the fact the the rifle classes were pants (sniper rifles should kill in 1 hit ffs, especially in a game set in ww2), I just didn't get on with it. Battlefield2 however is a totally different gameIt's actaully good this time around
COD:UO is way too short, and a bit easy tbh, BUT it is great fun, classic COD action. even better if you have 20 quid get BF2 off ebay or second hand, you won't regret it, aside from WoW I play BF2 the most, even now 4 months(3?) after release![]()
Ill admit most of teh rifles were pap, but how can you complain about 1 hit kills? If its ww2 then youd be more likely to get 1 hit kills cos of the lack of body armour etc. Hell, lets see you get shot with a handgun and still be able to run around bunny hopping everywhere and not even throw your aim off slightly.Originally Posted by Spud1
If you can battlefield vietnam then ++good, otherwise i wouldnt bother, call of duty was ace, never played UO though so i cant comment, i doubt youll find as many people playing either online with the advent of BF2 and the new COD
Originally Posted by herulach
I think you mis-read what i putI was saying there are not enough one-hit kills, ie a shot with a sniper rifle to the chest should have done 100dmg.
anyway stick wtih COD, Pre BF2 the BF series was pap![]()
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)