Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood Demo

The demo for Brothers in Arms: Earned in Blood is now available, offering the chance to sample Gearbox Software's World War II shooter sequel. The demo offers one single player mission as well as a skirmish map with solo and multiplayer support. The 615 MB download is available on 3D Downloads, 3D Gamers, 4players.de, Boomtown (registration required), ActionTrip, Boomtown (registration required), Computer Games (Romaina), FileFront, Filerush (torrent), FileShack, Fragland.net, Gameguru Mania, Gamer's Hell, GameSpot DLX (registration required), PC Gameworld, Strategy Informer, VGPro, and Worthplaying.
View : : :
42 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older
42.
 
Re: Impressions
Sep 22, 2005, 05:28
42.
Re: Impressions Sep 22, 2005, 05:28
Sep 22, 2005, 05:28
 
Console ports aren't limited by texture and graphical memory... They're limited by the control system...

I feel a fair amount of console games look way above average (well, as long as they're originally on the GameCube or Xbox anyway) but the over-catering for 2 Analogue sticks and about 6 buttons drastically limits the game, often requiring it to be massively simplified (Invisible War) or have the controls contextual or doubled-up (Chaos Theory)

Brothers in Arms drastically needs more squad control, but this isn't going to happen as long as it has to work on a dual-shock controller, which is already using most of it's available functions to control the player character...

Avatar 23755
41.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 22, 2005, 03:26
41.
Re: No subject Sep 22, 2005, 03:26
Sep 22, 2005, 03:26
 
I will never understand why developers/publishers put protection on demos. Demos are free and meant to be distributed so what's the point?
As I understand it, it's because Starforce becomes part of the code of the game, as opposed to just a CD check or whatever. Chances are in the demo that it is the same part of the code as in the full game. If you don't include Starfore, it is immediately obvious to hackers where the code is by just looking at the difference between the two.

___________________________________
This post is shamefully brought to you using someone else's unsecured wireless network
Avatar 18712
40.
 
Bit Torret
Sep 22, 2005, 03:18
40.
Bit Torret Sep 22, 2005, 03:18
Sep 22, 2005, 03:18
 
Here's a Bit Torrent of the demo: http://www.gamedr.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6

Registration not required, but feel free. I'll be adding more forum sections soon for general chat.

39.
 
Re: Starforce
Sep 22, 2005, 01:44
39.
Re: Starforce Sep 22, 2005, 01:44
Sep 22, 2005, 01:44
 


Well, in spite of what I said earlier, I've had a slight shange of heart with regard to this game:

Co-op skirmishes are FUN.


If this ships with a decent number of maps for that side of the game, I'll probably pick this one up after all..

-----
GW: Tashen Boke [R/Me]; Rosti The Ninja [Mo/R]; Gort Grimley [W/Ne]
-----
I'm not even angry. I'm being so sincere right now, even though you broke my heart and killed me.
38.
 
Starforce
Sep 21, 2005, 22:27
38.
Starforce Sep 21, 2005, 22:27
Sep 21, 2005, 22:27
 
Man, and I wanted to play this, too.
But Starforce = no download.

Avatar 13818
37.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 21, 2005, 21:53
37.
Re: No subject Sep 21, 2005, 21:53
Sep 21, 2005, 21:53
 
First off -- it's StarForce. First game was too IIRC.

First BiA was SafeDisc 4. And yeah, Starforce sucks. Ubisoft seems to love it, though, meaning that most of their upcoming releases will use it.

I will never understand why developers/publishers put protection on demos. Demos are free and meant to be distributed so what's the point?
This comment was edited on Sep 21, 21:56.
36.
 
Re: Impressions
Sep 21, 2005, 21:14
36.
Re: Impressions Sep 21, 2005, 21:14
Sep 21, 2005, 21:14
 
Console ports will be a 4 letter word once PC Hardware dramatically surpasses console hardware and history has shown us that happens every single time.

35.
 
Re: Impressions
Sep 21, 2005, 21:12
Prez
 
35.
Re: Impressions Sep 21, 2005, 21:12
Sep 21, 2005, 21:12
 Prez
 
Not to go off topic, but in the very near future, console port will no longer be a 4-letter word in the lexicon of PC gamers. With the PS3 and X-360, texture and system memory will be high enought o not be a design limitation.

Console port or not, BiA felt like a PC game to me.

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Avatar 17185
34.
 
Impressions
Sep 21, 2005, 21:05
34.
Impressions Sep 21, 2005, 21:05
Sep 21, 2005, 21:05
 
Well, I was unimpressed with the original Brothers In Arms and some might remember the response I got on here from Randy Pitchford. It was nice to see a developer responding to a critic and it seemed like he cared what we had to say. As such, I decided to give this demo a run to see if they had improved on the original game. Unfortunately, I have to say they didn't. Virtually all of the original technical problems with the game are still present and the gameplay is just more of the same:

* Despite what is claimed, this is VERY clearly an Xbox port. The textures are low resolution and washed out and the controls and enemy responses seem tuned to the limitations of playing an FPS on a console.
* The surround sound problems are still there. Yes, they finally fixed it so 5.1 support actually functions, but when playing I had no center channel whatsoever and if I was looking straight at something, I couldn't hear it. I tested my speakers with Chaos Theory and my sound setup is fine.
* The game performs very poorly for how it looks. I ran it on my X800XL 256MB in 1024x768 with 4x antisotropic filtering turned on and in a firefight, it choked. Without AS filtering, is still noticeably slowed. I can run Chaos Theory in 1280x1024 with 4X AS filtering no problem at all and Half-Life 2 with even higher AS. Again, this to me indicates is was made for consoles first and the PC a distant second.
* The squad AI still regularly gets stuck or doesn't do what you ask. They often stop dead in the middle of an open area (consequently getting shot), don't find cover and will sometimes assault enemy positions, only to pause for several seconds (and taking damage) before opening fire.
* The gameplay is still very repetitive. Lay down supressing fire, flank the enemy and kill them yourself (if you don't want to risk your squad getting themselves killed), rinse repeat. I appreciate that you can only do so much in a squad-based game without it getting too complicated, but this just seems too simplistic to me.
* Your squadmates only seem to know three phrases for each situation and they insist on repeating them over and over again. Hearing the same three lines every five seconds while they are supressing breaks the experience. If they couldn't put in more dialogue, it should have been spread out some.
* This is just another series of missions for the same game. It is an expansion and worth expansion price. It is NOT worth full game price just to play another series of missions. This is the EA Sports yearly purchase idea cutting into other genres.

I don't know, some people liked the original Brothers In Arms and if you did, you'll probably like this (though you might not want to shell out full game price for it.) I'll definitely be passing on this one and I'd have to recommend others do the same, at least on the PC version. I'm way more excited about Call of Duty 2. I don't know, for all the people that hate Irrational over T:V, I personally think Gearbox has a lot more redeeming to do.


Parallax Abstraction
Ottawa, Canada
www.pxa.ca

This comment was edited on Sep 21, 21:09.
Parallax Abstraction
Twitch | YouTube | Podcast
Avatar 13614
33.
 
I think I'll pass on this one too
Sep 21, 2005, 19:31
33.
I think I'll pass on this one too Sep 21, 2005, 19:31
Sep 21, 2005, 19:31
 
My problems with the original BiA was that for a game that presented itself as being a "realistic" WW2 combat experience, I couldn't do such basic infantry tactics as going prone and sprinting. To me, those omissions were needless and sorely missed.

And I fully agree with the sentiments regarding the unrealistic inaccuracy of the weapons when I have the enemy at no more than 10 meters in front of me in the dead center of my sights when I'm aiming at his chest, not his head. That's not "historically accurate", that's bloody annoying.

32.
 
LOL
Sep 21, 2005, 19:17
32.
LOL Sep 21, 2005, 19:17
Sep 21, 2005, 19:17
 
"If you're going to do that, make it visually behind cover, or let me shoot it."

Good point.




31.
 
Re: New Game Modes
Sep 21, 2005, 16:31
31.
Re: New Game Modes Sep 21, 2005, 16:31
Sep 21, 2005, 16:31
 
Well when you've put a couple of clips into the same spot and not got a hit, I'd call that falling on the wrong side of fun, accurate or not.

Also it wasn't consistent. If you came across an enemy in the open, you could take him down very easily. It seemed to me they were using cover in an all or nothing fashion.

This comment was edited on Sep 21, 16:33.
30.
 
Re: New Game Modes
Sep 21, 2005, 16:25
30.
Re: New Game Modes Sep 21, 2005, 16:25
Sep 21, 2005, 16:25
 
I also didn't like the fact that you could be using iron sights with an enemy head dead centre and nothing would touch it because it was deemed to be behind cover.

Not true, it could just feel that way at times. The aiming system sometimes felt a little inconsistent but under combat conditions it can be very difficult to consistently fire your weapon accurately. To me it felt realistic: it wasn't impossible but it was tough to do on a regular basis.

29.
 
No subject
Sep 21, 2005, 16:15
29.
No subject Sep 21, 2005, 16:15
Sep 21, 2005, 16:15
 
Minimum System Requirements:

[...]

* DVD drive

I'm thrilled that the demo's minimum system requirements list a DVD drive as being required!

28.
 
No subject
Sep 21, 2005, 16:03
28.
No subject Sep 21, 2005, 16:03
Sep 21, 2005, 16:03
 
Based on these reviews and buying and being totally unhappy with the console-esque crap of the first one I'm staying away from this like a brown floaty in a pool.

Seacrest OUT!

27.
 
More WWII Crap.
Sep 21, 2005, 15:54
27.
More WWII Crap. Sep 21, 2005, 15:54
Sep 21, 2005, 15:54
 
Yet another mindless, give us some of that money too, crap piece of shit game. Just like the last one. JUNK!

26.
 
Re: No subject
Sep 21, 2005, 15:29
26.
Re: No subject Sep 21, 2005, 15:29
Sep 21, 2005, 15:29
 
First off -- it's StarForce. First game was too IIRC.



Sadly, while this one looks better and runs better than the first game, they haven't done ANYTHING to address my only real beef with that game.

Namely, I hate the fact that once you've got the Germans suppressed, they don't do anything about changing that.

Apparently, they haven't discovered the magic of an Assault Team/Fire Team combination for themselves, so you NEVER have to worry that once you've got one group of baddies suppressed, they're sneakily sending another squad around behind you or anything.

It makes the battles extremely one-dimensional, as once you've accomplished stage one (suppress), you're free to spend as long as you want figuring out how to accomplish stage two (flank)..

Beyond that, there are still all of the same squad AI problems from the first game:

- Germans rushing cover that you're already occupying the other side of merely because that's what they're scripted to do

- My own soldiers insisting on standing IN FRONT of cover merely because everyone's a little bunched up and they can't find a perfect place to stand back there. THEN complaining that a)they can't hit anything, and b)they're taking fire.

- Germans taking up firing positions in the exact same location their allies just got obliterated in, even if that location is still being suppressed

The list goes on, sadly, and just tells me that Gearbox really wasn't listening to the critiques of the first game at all.

What I see improved here: load times are shorter. The game runs better. Graphics are a *bit* more detailed. 3D sound works OOTB.

That's it, and I really don't give a rat's ass about seeing improvements to ANY of those things when there are basic problems with THE GAMEPLAY.

*shrug* oh well, I had hoped they'd work out the kinks, but even with co-op I'm not buying this.

Glad they release demos of these things, because there's not a part of me now that thinks the third one they've just announced will behave any differently..


Yo, DuvalMagic: What gives???

-----
GW: Tashen Boke [R/Me]; Rosti The Ninja [Mo/R]; Gort Grimley [W/Ne]
-----
I'm not even angry. I'm being so sincere right now, even though you broke my heart and killed me.
25.
 
Re: New Game Modes
Sep 21, 2005, 15:26
25.
Re: New Game Modes Sep 21, 2005, 15:26
Sep 21, 2005, 15:26
 
Think I'll pass on this. I didn't like the game mechanics of the first one, and it doesn't seem like much has changed.

BIA just seemed to be neither one thing or the other. It was trying to be more realistic, requiring a squad to suppress and flank, but then it didn't even allow you to go prone.

I also didn't like the fact that you could be using iron sights with an enemy head dead centre and nothing would touch it because it was deemed to be behind cover. If you're going to do that, make it visually behind cover, or let me shoot it.

24.
 
New Game Modes
Sep 21, 2005, 15:13
24.
New Game Modes Sep 21, 2005, 15:13
Sep 21, 2005, 15:13
 
I just quickly played the demo to see what's new.

Quick Review:

Story Mode:
I wasn't too impressed - but I didn't get very far either - I just kind of rushed forward to see what was new - Quick impression the sound seems louder and the enviroment a little tense with arty coming down - but I didn't notice a drastic change - note i only got as far as down the street

Skirmish mode:

Defemd: I think this is what is going to sell me on the game - I play with my buddy and doing defense with him would be a blast - the germans pour over walls and come in waves while you try to fend them off - unlike the first game these guys to not sit still and rushed me on both sides a few times.

Hopefully you can indeed play skirmish mode with a friend

Timed: I didn't try this - looks like you have to kill of bad guys before t imes up

Objective: blow something up - what was interesting about this mode is you could change the AI settings - play quickly and died fast when i maxed them out - They could shoot too well even when mostly in cover (me that is)

Overall:

I'm sure I'll pick this up for the co-op mode mainly. For me it's a buddy game.

Avatar 21848
23.
 
No subject
Sep 21, 2005, 15:06
23.
No subject Sep 21, 2005, 15:06
Sep 21, 2005, 15:06
 
God only knows what protection it has on it (i cba to find out fully either), but im guessing it's starforce. Purely because the "protection successfully installed, must reboot your computer now" box looks identical to the one on SC: Chaos Theory and on Trackmania: Sunrise.

Apart from that it just seems more of the same. If you liked Brothers in Arms you'll like this, but otherwise it's more of an average WW2 shooter. The command system is still the same, and still feels awkward considering that (with me anyway) i'm way too busy trying to keep myself alive so i often forget to commad men to do something. it would be nice if it was just a simple command structure like in SWAT 3 (ok it wasnt simple, but once you remembered which numbers did which things it became second nature) instead of this hold right mouse button lark.

Looking down the rifle and shooting things still seems wierd to me in this game. For some reason i don't think you hit where your crosshairs are when you're looking down the sight, and that does annoy me intensly. It also seems as if more the game is now scripted, unlike in the previous one where only a few sequences were scripted it cause the game (for me) to feel rather lifeless as it were.

Graphics look almost the same, maybe slightly better, and the engine looks as if it's low-spec friendly (judging that by the fact i managed to play it on top res 1280x1024 with everything on and no problems) but since i have a rather hi-end pc (AMD64 3500+, 1gb Ram and a 6800 Ultra) i can't fully comment on that.

One thing that does come out trumps in this is the sound. It's fantastic and even with my stereo system the bangs and bullets and all that jazz sound very very good.

Other than that, if you can stand starforce, and you liked BiA, even if you thought BiA was just average, check it out because it does seem an improvement on the original.

42 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older