Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Battlefield 1943 Q&As

There's a Battlefield 1943 Q&A on Gustav Halling's blog as this DICE developer offers a translation of questions and answers he provided the Swedish Battlefield community about Battlefield 1943, the just-announced return of the Battlefield series to World War II (thanks Mike Martinez). Also, this blog update from EA has a video from the New York Comic Con with fan reaction to the game, while this update has text questions and audio answers to some Battlefield 1943 questions from producer Gordon VanDyke.

View
25 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

25. 5 second Battlefield 1943 Q&A Feb 11, 2009, 19:14 Kxmode
 
Q: Is the war over?
A: No.
 
Avatar 18786
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 18:45 KilrathiAce
 
Wow< i wouldnt think of this day coming, but I am agreeing with dsmart big time here.  
Avatar 7413
 
"On 2646.215 I myself attacked & destroyed TCS Tiger's Claw in my Jalthi heavy fighter"
Bakhtosh Redclaw Nar Kiranka
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 17:52 Prez
 
A lone infantryman against a tank is unbalanced. A lone tank against a well-coordinated team is unbalanced (in favor of the well-coordinated team). 2 good teams with armor, air, and infantry is not only balanced, it's multiplayer bliss.  
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 14:03 Jackplug
 
After watching these brainless noobs go on about the Battlefield
series theyve only played on a console as you can tell while wearing
their Halo 3 t-shirts makes me mad. Dice has sold us hardcore pc
gamers down the river, as they dont want to make a pc only game when
they can make 1 game that can be ported over from a console to the
pc and still look nice. The thing is when ported over it plays like
a console too which sux.

Well all i can say is its easy we just go buy Arma 2 or Flashpoint 2
cos Dice hasnt the balls to make BF3, BF3 would sell millions of
copies. I say sod em, let em rot with their games that requires a 6+
year old to play em.

This comment was edited on Feb 10, 2009, 14:07.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 13:27 LittleMe
 
Bluesfanboi is right on. There's a rock-paper-scissors going on in BF2 (and 2142). It works well. Also.. Yes one person in a tank can kill more than one infantry but that's part of the map design and those control points where the tanks spawn can often be taken by either side. The maps are balanced well.

If you get angry that a guy in a tank killed you, you aren't looking at the larger picture of the battlefield.

Was playing the BF2 Special Forces expansion yesterday and those maps seem tighter to me. The game is so fast there. The tanks can do damage, but they are limited in their movement and team mates spot them (shows on radar). The tanks makes the game more diverse and dynamic. I love them.

This comment was edited on Feb 11, 2009, 00:13.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 13:08 Bluesfanboi
 
I'm not sure I have an appreciation of your position, as the balance between vehicles and infantry has been seemingly met.

Making infantry more effective against vehicles isn't really desirable from a game play aspect, nor is it realistic..at least the video-game realism we expect.

Vehicles are easily countered by Air Support and other methods, keeping the rock-paper-scissors tension between their superiority over infantry!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 12:22 sponge
 
Really? One of the only things I found balanced was that vehicles were only able to be heavily damaged/destroyed by certain anti-vehicle weapons carrying classes, this is close to reality.

Reality is not balanced. I don't equate the two at all, and I certainly don't find reality to be remotely important, especially in a game like BF which is basically a non-realistic shooter in the first place. Mind you, I'm not saying an M16 should bring a tank down to half health, but I'd be happy with 3 or 4 people able to really chip away with their MGs at a tank.

The problem with making vehicles require teamwork to take down is that it makes one person in a vehicle more effective than multiple people in the field. So the other team takes a vehicle of their own. Things eventually escalate to the situation you have now in BF: people gunning each other down on runways just to get a vehicle or a plane. Or less extreme, everybody trying/wanting to be in a vehicle as often as possible.

I'm not interested in a vehicle-based shooter, which is why despite having bought and played a decent bit of BF2 ( some 34 hours according to my xfire http://www.xfire.com/profile/spongeh/ ) I am ultimately uninterested in Bad Company, what they're doing with BF1943, and surely any future games that are more direct sequels.

This comment was edited on Feb 10, 2009, 12:24.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 11:39 Wildone
 
Just look at the 'fan reaction' video, these poor saps probably never even played the original and they are calling this 'awesome'...

 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 10:48  dsmart 
 
If we removed all destruction and all our vehicles we could have more players. But no other game gives you the wide gaming experience we have!

Yah. They're fucking insane. Considering that our new game has 400 sq. km to play with. And IIRC, even the upcoming OFP2 and ArmaA II have terrain larger than any BF game.

Wankers.
 
Avatar 9141
 
Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead
...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 10:27 LittleMe
 
Well it is true that many old shooter games from the 80s never had stuff like reloading, health and ammo counts and they were fun. Its just that it makes the game seem so arcade-like, or dumbed down. I think also that for modern FPS's we like reloading as it makes us feel macho. No really it is cool to watch the reload and it adds to the immersiveness of the game too.

The old Battlefield games moved in the opposite direction too. Now DiCE has taken a 180 degree turn and it is shocking/painful to see one of the best of FPS developers go down in flames like they are.

This comment was edited on Feb 10, 2009, 10:28.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 09:28 Veinman
 
With a cool-down, you wouldn't be able to bomb away. All you are really skipping is having to come down near the runway. Granted, that was a risky maneuver.

I was never a pilot back when I played. My thing was sniping.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 08:35 InBlack
 
Veinman it becomes an issue when you have unlimited bombs (in a fighter-bomber for example)  
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 08:04 vrok
 
Requiring players to actually kill someone and take their kit to scrounge ammo is too hardcore apparently.

This comment was edited on Feb 10, 2009, 08:04.
 
Avatar 54711
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 07:56 Veinman
 
I wish someone would tell companies that EVERY game doesn't need regenerating health. It works sometimes, but it just doesn't belong here.

The ammo issue... that's really not a big deal. Running out of ammo in BF1942 wasn't really all that common.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 06:02 LittleMe
 
Although I *do* like that each of the 3 classes has some sort of anti-tank weapon, always hated that you essentially had to run away from a vehicle if you didn't have any explosives on you. Couldn't even scratch the armor on vehicles. If I wanted to run away from things, I'd goto a bar and try and pick up women.

Oh well then this game is for you. Try the console version. You can surf the 360/PS3 forums too. Cya!
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 05:56 Prez
 
"always hated that you essentially had to run away from a vehicle if you didn't have any explosives on you. Couldn't even scratch the armor on vehicles."

That was by design (not to mention realistic). It was a simple way of encouraging teamwork. It pains me that this game even has "Battlefield" in the title.
 
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 04:29 Bluesfanboi
 
"always hated that you essentially had to run away from a vehicle if you didn't have any explosives on you. Couldn't even scratch the armor on vehicles."

Really? One of the only things I found balanced was that vehicles were only able to be heavily damaged/destroyed by certain anti-vehicle weapons carrying classes, this is close to reality.

As is the ubiquitous grenade which does minimal damage. The contrast to this is that actual Anti vehicle weapons are generally one shot one kill, so restricting them is an easy call...especially considering the hard points located all about the maps with anti vehicle weapons!
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 04:26 InBlack
 
COD4 was brilliant in its own right. (IMO)

This however, is rape.

I hope this game bombs like the shit, but unfortunately because of something I call "the console effect" it will probably do well and spawn several sequels.

"the console effect" - a paradoxical effect whereby every new game released on the latest consoles sells over a million units, regardless of quality.

This comment was edited on Feb 10, 2009, 04:27.
 
Avatar 46994
 
I have a nifty blue line!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 03:36 LittleMe
 
another studio raped by EA.

Well since BF2 was released under and apparently funded by EA, it seems to me to be more of a directional change by higher-ups. When PC was king of the FPS, we were catered to. Now PC is no longer ruling the FPS scene.

COD4, Halo3 showed that massive amounts of money can be made catering to the consoles. True though that the PC version of COD4 wasn't too consolized though, but it was some.

I don't blame EA for chasing money but I do fault them for ignoring good money to be made catering to the dedicated PC multiplayer FPS, like the old Battlefield games.

I think it will be a while but they'll come around especially since the $400+ consoles of this generation were flops compared to the cheaper (to make) Wii.
 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&As Feb 10, 2009, 02:38 sponge
 
Also, go to any gaming forum, Battlefield fans are going batshit crazy over this(including me), and it's funny how the console players just don't care about the franchise being dumbed down to hell, it's depressing really.

I don't really care, either, but if you want to make this another PC vs the Console boogeyman, then sure.

Although I *do* like that each of the 3 classes has some sort of anti-tank weapon, always hated that you essentially had to run away from a vehicle if you didn't have any explosives on you. Couldn't even scratch the armor on vehicles. If I wanted to run away from things, I'd goto a bar and try and pick up women.

Just too bad that long needed change came at the expense of other not so needed changes.

Regardless, just another (read: any) BF game that I don't really care about.

This comment was edited on Feb 10, 2009, 02:40.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo