Battlefield 1943

    Just read that too and i lost my spunk for this too.... I was a huge bf2/bf2142 fan... Why do i get the feeling they are avoiding what makes the BF series great? Lots of guns/vehicles/options + Massive maps + Lots of people. Now what i see on the latest bf games is: Less people + Less Guns/Vehicles/Options.... I mean they still got pretty decent sized maps but what the heck? I am sure if they were to do a full scale game that was up to par with bf2 it would be a massive success... But i guess they want to do smaller games like this and BF Heroes.... laaaaame

    Okay mother fucker, this seems a bit more like my thing!

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

    Quote

    The Conquest game mode returned to Bad Company due to overwhelming requests from players during the beta testing. Conquest was the prevalent game-mode in many of the preceding Battlefield games, and involves reducing the opponents' "ticket" meter by scoring kills and capturing strategically placed flags.The game has 25 ranks, each from the U.S. Army (corporal, sergeant, Colonel etc.), much like its PC counterpart, Battlefield 2 (although BF2 uses Marine Corps ranks).

    The highest rank (General of the Army) takes 37,000 in-game points, compared to an average of 50-650 per game. Unlock credits may be obtained by ranking up and then the aforementioned credits may be used to unlock weapons.

    From what I can tell, this shit is classic Battlefield (2) through and through. Considering that the sequel is getting a full PC version, will almost certainly have more unlocks/etc, and that conquest will be built in from the beginning... well, roll on Bad Company 2.

    I guess the most striking difference is that there's no commander role, but whether or not that'll be the case for the sequel is an unknown. Whatever the case though, I think I'll enjoy this a lot more than 1943 which seems a bit too watered down.

    Yeah, that's the original Bad Company in the video. The sequel is coming out around the end of the year, and will have a full-blown PC release unlike its predecessor.

    The most compelling thing for me is that the Bad Company engine has very destructable environments, meaning trees and walls won't stop your tank dead in its tracks like they annoyingly do in BF2 and BF2142. Plus obviously it means tiny little bits of cover won't necessarily save your skin, etc. I think that aspect alone will add a lot to the experience.

    Depends on the game. Battlefield is more like Team Fortress 2 in that the unlockable kits aren't really upgrades as such, but more like alternatives. For example in 2142, the assault class could unlock an automatic rifle that fired more slowly than the default and had much higher recoil, but each shot had more stopping power. So it was more difficult to use, but when mastered was very effective — you just had to make every shot count.

    I think it works well because it's an incentive to keep playing (I can almost see where this MMORPG addiction comes from), and also introduces the weapons that're a bit easier to wield to the newbies. I see the unlockables in TF2 the same way, where newbies are given the chance to simply get used to the regular weapons and then the depth is layered on gradually.

    With that said, there are some anomalies such as one later unlockable in BF2142 basically being a direct upgrade of an earlier one (stealth camo that lasts twice as long), but it doesn't really have much of an overall impact.

    mmmmh i think its enough with battlefield and its enough with wwII. quake wars makes lots of more fun

    the latest best battlefield was bf2 and battlefield heros ist funny too, but thats all.

    Quote from Pampers

    maxplayers? 24 32 64?

    Very unlikely it can't be altered with configs on the PC, CSS has a max player cap of 32, that doesn't do anything to stop 60 man servers. Hence why people didn't react badly to 1943's 24 player cap (which is attrocious for a BF game) until it got attached to three classes, everyone gets anti-vehicle weapons, and infinite ammo and health regen.

    Quote from Thrik

    Depends on the game. Battlefield is more like Team Fortress 2 in that the unlockable kits aren't really upgrades as such, but more like alternatives. For example in 2142, the assault class could unlock an automatic rifle that fired more slowly than the default and had much higher recoil, but each shot had more stopping power. So it was more difficult to use, but when mastered was very effective — you just had to make every shot count.

    I don’t really think it’s a good mechanic in Team Fortress 2 either, though this is contrary to what I said when that change was first announced. At least ranking is better than a set of madcap achievements.

    I know it's just a carrot and stick for casual-orientated shootan games, but it seems to jeopardise what competitive side remains.

    Ah, well I suppose you're right there — it's definitely not much good for competitive play. I do think it adds good value to the general public experience though, which is all I've generally gotten from multiplayer games for years now.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!

Register Yourself Login