And right there you answerd your own question. Thats why there were no “inteligent comments”.
You see, if you did any research like you say you did, then you would know that your second question was correct and you did not need to bother us by asking it
ET:QW isnt gonna be BF like because big maps and vehicles can be used with the RTCW:ET style
Exactly. In some of the recent interviews you can read that ppl who played the game say that vehicles do not feel overpowerd and can be counterd effectively. With battlefield the case is exactly the opposite: vehicles are overpowerd to infantry and are difficult to counter.
As for the maps. If you looked any closer at QW maps you would notice that the fighting only goes on on one half of the map at a time. So actualy maps are devided in several smaller areas and teams go fightning from one area to another, just like ET. Unlike battlefield where the teams fight on the whole map at the same time.
Aim style will be the same, and tj’s and movement will remain.
It has already been mentioned that players move fast just like ET/ Quake style and not as slow as soldiers move in Battlefield, and you will prolly be able to use bunnyhoping/ trickjumping as well. Also it was mentioned that aiming is very accurate, there is minimal bullet spread and most of the shots hit exactly where you aim. On the other hand Battlefield weapons have a terrible spread and low accuracy.
I hope this will end the damn “Will QW be like Battlefield” debate, becouse if QW is going to be like anything then it will be like ET, and definetly not like Battlefield.