- Joined
- May 3, 2003
- Location
- Seattle Washington
which one is better, because i wanna get atleast one of them tommarow
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Xenocide said:vietnam is more realistic, but it can be very unfun when people are spawn camping. there are still some major bugs too. 42 for me atleast is ONLY a lan game. its fun when you have people near you playing, but not online, too unrealistic
CheeseMan said:oh good point, how much you think it would cost? and how much vitnamn cost?
Agreed. BFV is a great game though.Bashar said:Plus with 1942 you can DL and play Desert Combat.... and some other good mods. Get 1942 and play it for awhile, then get BF:VT when it drops to $20-25.
Banyan said:if i were making this decision i would lean towards joint operations... various reasons but to name a few:
1) jo is not cartoonish at all
2)striving for realism out of the box
3)the devs are on it big-time with fixes and improvements
4)people are WAY more likely to play as a team vs what i saw in the 1.5 years i played bf + mods which makes it that much better
5)the fighting revolves around infantry/squads and not a bunch of morons waiting around for the next plane/tank/whatever to spawn...
6)the game physics are very good... damage is realistic, trajectory etc is all there.
if you do pickup bf1942 i would look at some of the other mods besides the completely played out desert combat. there is some very good ww2 mods out there that have put some realism into the game. and at $20ish bf + all the mods you can't go wrong. keep an eye on gogamer.com, they have some good sales at times.