ohim :
@childofthekorn when you say about only 1 building collapsing you clearly talk about Battlefield 4, well they could easy make every building collapse but that would make the map a big field of ruble ... after all a game is a game and the limitations are in place to make the game have maps that after 30 mins of gameplay they don`t all look the same like a giant ruble. If you talk about realism then why do you need a crosshair on your screen , why do you have a health bar , why do you know exactly how many bullets are in your magazine, and why the hell are your opponents have blue or red markers ...(BF4 removes all of these in hardcore mode) but if you talk about realism how do you calculate 1% HP relative to real life... let`s be reasonable..some things are bound not to be real life like.
As a fan of the destruction in bad company 2 (as infantile as the destruction was) that was the beautiful thing. It went from a town to smoldering rubble by the end of the map. It forced players to continue to change their strategy up, not only to counter the enemy, but also to adapt to an ever changing environment. Regarding the crosshairs argument, which is off point and totally disregards the fact i do play Hardcore modes primarily, I didn't mention anything regarding realism, I'd join the military if I wanted reality instead of virtual warfare. It's holding a company to their marketing BS. Claiming to have the highest levels of destructibility (their main marketing point against the COD series) and offering a map of metro landscape with only 1 skyscraper that can be brought down should be seen as a slap to the face to Battlefield fans. Seeing the entire city crumble, would not only make the dynamics of the map more interesting but also be a huge innovation to how physics and CPU utilization are handled due to the optimization required.
So as you can see, its not that its "unrealistic" otherwise I'd be calling to have every floor occupy-able and only being able to reflect scopes when the maps sun, is in the perfect position, no health regen and only med evacs back to base where you'll respawn as a different soldier as long as you don't bleed out prior to being evac'd, bullets actually rotate in the air instead of going in a straight line (would love to see bullet drop return), helicopters blades being torn apart when too close to objects and being able to kill players with said blades. It's more of a strategy element that sets the later battlefields apart from the rest.
The only battlefield I do not own is 2142 (due to money constraints at the time) and I have watched this series evolve with each title, with bf3 going to bf4, i see the exact opposite. With this latest installment, I saw the same things I witnessed the COD series do over the course of several titles and for me personally, I will hold onto my money and wait to see if they'll bring the modern Battlefield series to their roots and allow us to wage a virtual war using war machines which hasn't been seen since 2142 (Titan mode ftw).