The Great Debate

The Great Debate

Attached: BF.png (1434x941, 1.82M)

Not really.
4 is just better in pretty much every way.
It honestly makes 3 kind of irrelevant.

BF4 is just BF3 with shittier maps.

t. console rush pleb

Battlefield hardline

Cope all day long. I've played both. BF4 might as well be COD with how shit and enclosed the maps are.

what was his fucking problem?

Attached: solomon battlefield 3.jpg (672x390, 72.59K)

there is no debate

Attached: BF2Box.jpg (937x1328, 327.28K)

(((Russian)))
Yes, because I sure love absolutely horrendously dog shit hit reg and a meta that centers around spamming nades on every corner to circumvent this. Pelt someone in the chest with 20 rounds and their player model just absorbs 90% of your rounds and spazzes out.

4 is the best game in the frostbite era
3 is just a worse version of 4.
It wasn't bad. It certainly got better with time and DLC, but that's all true for 4 many times over

glowfag

4 has the shittiest vehicles to fight against

all 4 refractor games are great
it really just comes down to personal preference

Attached: soul.png (1355x1902, 3.43M)

Bad Company 2

both shit

yikes

>refractor era
2 > 1942 > Vietnam = 2142
No game in this era is bad tho

>Frostbite Era
4 > 1 > 3 > 5 > 1943 > BC2 > BC
Didn't bother including Hardline.
BF4 is, at this point, the most well polished game in the series. The biggest knock on it is that it's not unique enough and is essentially BF3.5
5 is actually a bit underrated, but still flawed

based

>BF4
>Bought an SSD early
>always loaded in faster than shitters with HDDs and potato pc's
>always get the jet first everytime
shit was fucking cash

>4 > 1 > 3 > 5 > 1943 > BC2 > BC
absolutely flawless taste

4 has a forced nigger and stronk women in the story, so it loses

>story
retard

4 is just a better 3

mad he couldnt lay down.

bad company 1 and 2 had the best story kill yourself if you think otherwise