I absolutely adore the "Battlefield" series of games, and it all started with "Bad Company 2"in 2010. Prior to my experience with the game, I was really into the "Call of Duty"series. How naive I was…

"Battlefield" has been around in the video game market since 2002, but because I never possessed a PC with enough power to run them, I was never able to play the older PC exclusives. But when "Bad Company 2" was released on the Xbox 360, I was immediately hooked and a dedicated fan of the series to come.

But as the series progresses, we have yet to see an official sequel to what many consider a fan favorite. I honestly believe that a return to the "Bad Company"story is not only a well-deserved change of pace, but also a necessity if EA intends to bring in more players. Here are a few reasons why I believe that "Bad Company 2" was incredible enough to deserve a sequel.

Veteran Weapons

For those of you who don't know, "Bad Company 2"featured a trio of World War II weapons available for use in the otherwise modern day first-person shooter: the Colt M1911 .45 pistol, the M1A1 Thompson submachine gun and the M1 Garand available for those who played at least one previous "Battlefield"game (also known as Battlefield Veterans). These weapons could not be customized to the extent of the modern weapons, but they were still a lot of fun to use. In my experience, it felt as if I was stepping back in time on the battlefield, and doing well with these weapons quickly became one of the most enjoyable experiences in a military shooter.

Gameplay Balance

I have played "Battlefield 3"and "Battlefield 4," but I must admit that the gameplay was not as balanced as "Bad Company 2." The classes for the elder title were quite different, resulting in a different team dynamic. But the gameplay seemed more balanced to me. No weapon, kit or strategy managed to stand out objectively as the best in the game, which made it more probable and fun to experiment with gadgets that you would not typically use.

I remember a number of “phases” during my tenure with the game, such as my anti-tank Engineer run with an M2 Gustov launcher and SCAR-L carbine, as well as my beloved XM8 Assault run. None of these phases felt any less contributory to the digital war effort. In addition to simulated infantry combat, vehicles felt like the game-changing powerhouses they were intended to be. Although I am ultimately happy with the vehicle combat in "Battlefield 4," the recent games suggest the engineers used papier-mâché for armor, especially for the amphibious and aquatic vehicles.

Superior Map Design

I will admit that superior can be a strong word, but in this sense, I preferred "Bad Company 2"'smaps because it seemed as though they were designed around their game modes rather than the modes having to accommodate the generic map design of later games. Moreover, the elder title’s maps were much more memorable. I can still remember timeless spaces such as Valparaiso, Arica Harbor, Isla Inocentes and Nelson Bay. When it comes to maps designed for the Rush game type, their linear nature may not seem appealing, but they are carefully designed for the asymmetric warfare intended for the game. It resulted in truly tense and epic skirmishes as both an attacker and as a defender.

Memorable Campaign

If there is one thing that the "Bad Company"series does undeniably better than the rest of the "Battlefield"series, it's that it delivers a satisfying single-player campaign. In the story, the player experiences an escalating conflict with the power-hungry Russian military through the eyes of Army Private Preston Marlowe. He has a heart of gold, and he possesses an unusual amount of motivation during critical moments of the campaign. He fights alongside his buddies, George Gordon Haggard, Jr. and Terrence Sweetwater, who often bicker as if they were brothers. The squad is led by Sergeant Samuel Redford. He's a born leader, but even he sees a bit of leadership material in Marlowe on multiple occasions.

These characters drive an entertaining and enticing narrative that spans entire continents. The only unsatisfying thing about "Bad Company 2" is that the story ends in a pretty hefty cliffhanger with the Russians on America’s doorstep, and we have yet to see this story revisited since its 2010 release.

The more recent games have yet to bring characters of this magnitude to the table, and even the more enjoyable characters in "Battlefield 3" and "Battlefield 4"are unfortunately rarely ever seen again. This lack of continuity is just one symptom of lackluster campaign modes; hopefully a third "Bad Company" game could do away with that.

Lighthearted Tone

Perhaps my favorite aspect of "Bad Company 2"is the fact that its tone was much lighter than the mainstay games that came after it. While this may be difficult to explain, the darker tone combined with a more realistic approach managed to take away the staying power that "Bad Company 2" has. Just about every feature of the elder title suggests that the developers knew they were making a game that had no intention of taking itself seriously. Just think about the concept of Russia somehow being able to invade Europe, South America and Canada simultaneously, without major retaliation from the UN. Despite the preposterousness behind the premise, as well as the hilarious character interaction, DICE, the developers behind the series decided to run with it -- as a result they have effectively created a cult classic. Unlike "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" and "The Big Lebowski," however, this one demands a sequel.