Battlefield 1943 (not 42)

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Cheeseplug

Originally posted by: mrSHEiK124
24 player action? WEAK. That's why I haven't paid for a single BF game since 2142, I don't want "grueling 24 player action," I want a fucking 32 on 32 war.

Forget 32 on 32, remember when they were promising 64 v 64 before BF2 came out? I was so disappointed when it was still 32 v 32.

At least 32 vs 32 allowed for some epicness. 12 vs 12 on large maps will make the games complete vehicle/aircraft whore fests.

Yes, I will be buying it b/c I miss pwn'ing noobs. Plus, the 24 player limit won't have any effect on league play.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Jadow
only if it has native widescreen support

It should since the 1.5 patch for BF2 will have widescreen support.

 

[SunnyD]

Originally posted by: tfinch2

Originally posted by: mugs
I will definitely buy it on the Xbox 360, and I'll buy it for my friends if they're too cheap to buy it themselves.

So I'm getting a new game? Sweet!

He said 'friends'.

 

[clamum]

Kinda off-topic, but does anyone here still play BF2? Do a lot of people still play (i.e. is it easy to find a low-ping game with a decent number of players?)? The game was tits, might have to bust it out again if there's still a community.

 

[dudeman007]

Originally posted by: biggestmuff
We have a forum for this.

I'll be buying it even though it's only 3 maps. DICE is using what they are calling the Frostbit 1.5 engine which provides fully destructible buildings.

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
no. BF2 has earned them permanent "fuck you" status.

Care to elaborate? BF2 was great.

All of the BF engines have been crap and this is coming from someone who is a huge fan of the BF series. I still play BF1942 more than any other game. EA needs to stop worrying about stupid things like destructible buildings and focus on more prominent issues (specifically hit registration).

I agree that BF2 was a pretty big fuck you in comparison to BF1942. With 42 we were constantly getting new patches and more importantly, new maps. Although the release of BF2 1.5 has given us a new map and some improvements it has taken far too long. It was much to obvious that the EA crew was more occupied make 2142 then addressing the BF2 community. 2142 was a joke as well...BF2 in a giant costume.

 

[zerocool84]

12v12 cus consoles wouldn't be able to handle 32v32 and since it's just ganna be another crappy console port on PC and probably still have 360 buttons on ths screen.

 

[duragezic]

Looks pretty cool, but a lot like Heroes, no? It's less hardcore, more accessible, simpler game.

Which is fine with me. I think EA and DICE would be best creating a mass market BF game, and also a BF2 style game for the hardcore PC fans. But with this 1943, and Heroes, it seems like they got two mass market games. But how did this one come out so fast while Heroes is till not out for a while?

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: dudeman007

Originally posted by: biggestmuff
We have a forum for this.

I'll be buying it even though it's only 3 maps. DICE is using what they are calling the Frostbit 1.5 engine which provides fully destructible buildings.

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
no. BF2 has earned them permanent "fuck you" status.

Care to elaborate? BF2 was great.

All of the BF engines have been crap and this is coming from someone who is a huge fan of the BF series. I still play BF1942 more than any other game. EA needs to stop worrying about stupid things like destructible buildings and focus on more prominent issues (specifically hit registration).

I agree that BF2 was a pretty big fuck you in comparison to BF1942. With 42 we were constantly getting new patches and more importantly, new maps. Although the release of BF2 1.5 has given us a new map and some improvements it has taken far too long. It was much to obvious that the EA crew was more occupied make 2142 then addressing the BF2 community. 2142 was a joke as well...BF2 in a giant costume.

imho, since the other flopped they are going back to the last thing that made some good $$$ and still has a decent base

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: zerocool84
12v12 cus consoles wouldn't be able to handle 32v32 and since it's just ganna be another crappy console port on PC and probably still have 360 buttons on ths screen.

if it is a port, i see massive fail, just like the rb6 vegas games on pc.

 

[AmdEmAll]

PC gets fucked over again! GG

 

[Scarpozzi]

I may give it a try, but I can only play those games on PC. They have a tendency to make me dizzy when I'm not close to the screen.

I believe the best game is BF2 by design (weapons, maps, and vehicles). However, due to players and those who fight over vehicles....I've started playing Project Reality. If you ask me, it's the most fun I've ever had...slower pace and actual strategy required to win. This is especially true since you can setup forward outposts and rally points rather than being restricted to captured flags and squad leader positions (if the leader decides he/she wants to fight and take the chance on getting killed)

I hope other games follow the project reality model over the next few years....I've been nothing but impressed.

http://www.realitymod.com

 

[destrekor]

I've not been a big fan of the Battlefield games since 1942. I enjoyed BF2 for epic tank action, but that was about it, or playing LAN. I couldn't stand online multiplayer. Well actually, 1942 I never really played much online, aside from the feature and 'sploit differences, it was probably similar.

1943 though, for $15, and some of the maps they are basing the ones on, I am sold for sure. And include the features of the new engine, it sounds fun. I'll be getting it on PS3. As much as I prefer the PC for FPS games, I think I might just enjoy this more on the console. And honestly, large multiplayer showdowns can get boring sometimes. Maybe its because I'm not some epic master of FPS games, far from terrible mind you... I just like more personal battles. It's just far too much and people running around like idiots in the larger maps, and constantly dieing by sheer misfortune instead of lack of skill gets extremely annoying. Smaller teams makes it more in your face, work more for the kills, dieing sucks because you know it was most likely not simply bad luck, though possibly a little.

I'm really looking forward to the island map. That looks to be some fun.

Originally posted by: zerocool84
12v12 cus consoles wouldn't be able to handle 32v32 and since it's just ganna be another crappy console port on PC and probably still have 360 buttons on ths screen.

consoles can handle more than 12v12 EASILY if the game is done right.

Killzone 2 has 16v16 maps, Resistance 2 has 30v30. Either the engine is just coded poorly for console multiplayer capabilities, or it was a design choice. They could have bumped that up for the PC version, but they didn't. Could still be an engine issue, as it was probably an engine that had lead development on the 360, so who knows.

 

[Inspector Jihad]

if its a port, they can shove it. that includes removing the lame 24 player max.

 

[pontifex]

so basically it's going to be a mod for BF2 like 2142 was?

oh, and it will still suck...

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: pontifex
so basically it's going to be a mod for BF2 like 2142 was?

oh, and it will still suck...

No, it will be using a completely different engine. I believe it's using the Frostbyte engine used for Bad Company.

 

[pontifex]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: pontifex
so basically it's going to be a mod for BF2 like 2142 was?

oh, and it will still suck...

No, it will be using a completely different engine. I believe it's using the Frostbyte engine used for Bad Company.

i figured that must have been the reason for not price gouging us...

ha! maybe this is the reason:

"In Battlefield 1943, intense battles ensue over three classic and tropic locations; Wake Island, Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima"

only 3 maps. sounds like fun, for maybe an hour...

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: pontifex

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: pontifex
so basically it's going to be a mod for BF2 like 2142 was?

oh, and it will still suck...

No, it will be using a completely different engine. I believe it's using the Frostbyte engine used for Bad Company.

i figured that must have been the reason for not price gouging us...

ha! maybe this is the reason:

"In Battlefield 1943, intense battles ensue over three classic and tropic locations; Wake Island, Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima"

only 3 maps. sounds like fun, for maybe an hour...

Matters how you look at it. As a singleplayer game, yeah. But since it's online, play on a server full of friends and you could play for hundreds of hours.

 

[pontifex]

i don't care how good a game is. 3 maps is going to get old FAST. at least it does for me.

 

[GTaudiophile]

Will it be as poorly coded as all previous POS games in the BF series?

Great idea. Horrible implementation.

 

[exnickoh]

15 bux isnt bad I wonder if they are hurting that bad on game sales that they need to drop price.

 

[0roo0roo]

i remember what they did to damage the original series. poor support, splitting the user population with too many paid addons etc. ruined fast. so not for any price.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: The Boston Dangler
no. BF2 has earned them permanent "fuck you" status.

That's alright, 2142 was a big "fuck you" right back from them.

And BF:V was just a glorified mod, but it was a damn fun one.

 

[slayer202]

I don't remember BF2 on PC being that bad. I think it was pretty fun actually. of course its garbage compared to COD4 now though. 2142 was pretty crappy though. 1942 was cool. I hate FPS games on consoles but might buy it instead of waiting months for the pc

 

[bob4432]

Originally posted by: slayer202
I don't remember BF2 on PC being that bad. I think it was pretty fun actually. of course its garbage compared to COD4 now though. 2142 was pretty crappy though. 1942 was cool. I hate FPS games on consoles but might buy it instead of waiting months for the pc

imo bf1942 & bf2 were the best game produced thus far for my taste and i have been gaming on and off for 20yrs. i love the versatility and interactivity but sadly, ea did what they do best and really mess up a game on the backend. if they supported it like they should the game would still own everything else. there is no other comparison like it still.

badcompany on the 360 is bad.

bf:v felt like a bf2 beta, bf2142 was/is a joke. i would imagine that bf1943 is kind of like a bf3 beta that we pay for, much like bf:v - we pay for being beta testers for ea. this recent bf2 1.5 patch coming out is just ea getting the base going again so they can make more $$$.

the 3 maps portion of bf1943 is sad.

 

[Googer]

Originally posted by: MoPHo
Hell yea I'll download it. Assuming I don't get capped bandwidth before june...

Switch to Fios and get no false bandwidth test results.

http://www.jimgoings.com/2008/...review/comment-page-1/