BF1943 delayed until next year.

[Minmaster]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

heh and no less with nades that can be resupplied. at least we don't have martyrdom and tiny maps that make nade spam hard to avoid. at least in BF we have large maps so we can choose to avoid the area of nade spam if we choose.

[RangerXML]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

heh and no less with nades that can be resupplied. at least we don't have martyrdom and tiny maps that make nade spam hard to avoid. at least in BF we have large maps so we can choose to avoid the area of nade spam if we choose.

Yeah, good luck with that in Kirk-land:p

[Nate79]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

imo COD nailed player movement (except for jumping) and the weapon handling. Which is near perfect imo, no clunky, clumsy, overly hard to aim weapons with a bunch of bogus delays, sway and recoil. And the netcode is awesome in COD!

I'm a big Battlefield series fan and agree here. Some things are necessary for balance, but the weapons in BF2 should be more accurate.

[M0t0rBreath]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

I'm a big Battlefield series fan and agree here. Some things are necessary for balance, but the weapons in BF2 should be more accurate.

It's not that the weapons are not accurate, it's the hitreg that is always all over the place. If you prefer COD damage, then I don't know what to say to you, but that it'll suck for Battlefield. You have no chance to get back at him cause you'll be dead long ago. COD is really whoever see's the other person first is the one who wins.

[Col.Bunwhacker]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

It's not that the weapons are not accurate, it's the hitreg that is always all over the place. If you prefer COD damage, then I don't know what to say to you, but that it'll suck for Battlefield. You have no chance to get back at him cause you'll be dead long ago. COD is really whoever see's the other person first is the one who wins.

Thats how it works in gun battles, were not playing paintball you know. Beside theres nothing more annoying then shooting someone first and they end up killing you with a quick snapshot. Try being the guy who shoots first... And i played plenty of BF mods with deadly 1s1k weapons and it didnt suck at all. Infact its how BF games should be in the first place.

Theres a reason most BF2 players all use the most effective guns in the game, and not the least effective. Its because they dont want nerf guns either. Its also why COD is so hugely popular, even though almost everyone agree the maps are way to small nade spam fests, and it has lots of other not so good stuff too. You ask most COD player why they like COD though, and its the weapons and movement and overall feel despite all the bad stuff it has.

[RanCorX2]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

It's not that the weapons are not accurate, it's the hitreg that is always all over the place. If you prefer COD damage, then I don't know what to say to you, but that it'll suck for Battlefield. You have no chance to get back at him cause you'll be dead long ago. COD is really whoever see's the other person first is the one who wins.

I've never liked the accuracy in MP CoD, the guns always too way too accurate.

[Minmaster]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

i've never fired a gun before but according to many, they are accurate.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

Battlefield forum talking down on COD4 for nade spamming, it's like the pot calling the kettle black.

Someone should sig this quote. People dishing COD4 for aspects its doing much better than most games. Since 2004, COD4 has been the only game (bar TF2) to absolutely and positively shock the multiplayer scene, because its perfect in almost every aspect. The only, and really the only issues are way too crowded (anything over 16) servers and no mod support. In other aspects, it beats almost any multiplayer FPS game (bar a couple of Valves legends) with a stick of an immeasurable lenght.

As for BF1943. I havent particulaly liked what Ive seen so far, but if they go ahead and pick the parallel development route, instead of giving us a port, then I might check it out. And this news says its either A) stalling to get max profit from console versions or B) releasing a proper PC version.

[[GCA]Tim270]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

Cod4 is the perfect execution of a MP FPS, I dont think there is any argument there.

My argument is people trying to dress it up more more than it should be.

Only problem, more often then not soldiers arent carrying all that stuff, they put it down... Maybe on beach landings they have everything on. Do i need to post links to youtube videos of IRAQ combat?? I hope not..

--->pictures taken today

And RO has the worst most slow-mo clunky movement ive ever scene, not even remotely realistic. No one moves like that IRL. I hope you dont?

And again... I said it has realistically powered weapons and accuracy and player movement, NOT ITS A REALISM GAME. Man what ever happened to reading comprehension.

+ I said PR represents that not CoD4. Also there are plenty of examples of troops getting into contacts with full kit on.

@ The RO comment, RO is a game designed to promote the use of cover and gives advantages to it, ie your weapon is more accurate when doing so, how is that not realistic?. So answer to your question I would 'move like that in RL'

In my post I said its not a realism game, its not trying to be.

[Col.Bunwhacker]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

+ I said PR represents that not CoD4. Also there are plenty of examples of troops getting into contacts with full kit on.

I know you did, and i said i think COD represents it better. Especially their weapons, but thats more because of the difference between engines and COD's better hit reg. But over all the feel of the weapons is perfect in COD, it is not in PR Imho.

I dont like games or mods that have it where you alway have a full kit, and you're always incumbered the max amount. And everything is set to the slowest variable based on worst case scenerios.

The RO comment, RO is a game designed to promote the use of cover and gives advantages to it, ie your weapon is more accurate when doing so, how is that not realistic?. So answer to your question I would 'move like that in RL'

I know what they tried to accomplish and why, and it was the right track. But the execution stinks. The cover thing is way to tricky, you're constantly fighting the game on everything. You can never just hit the dirt or a window and get the accuracy benefit, half the time you cant even get the accuracy thing and aim at the target. To get it you have to aim off on an angle or at the ground..

And RO has ridiculous delays on every movement, again set to the slowest possible amount based on the worst case scenerio. Imo RO is one of the least realistic games ive ever played. Im going by the end result, not what they tried to accomplish.

Like i said, they had the right idea, but the end result is less then desirable and even more unrealistic because of these things, then not having them at all.

edit:
I just hope they take whats popular from all these other games, and also learn from the mistakes some other games have made, and with the next full Battlefield game, give us the best FPS ever. Because BF1943 sure isnt it... So imho it should be left to the consoles.

[Deesies]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

Call of Duty 4's multiplayer was terrible D:

[Col.Bunwhacker]

Re: BF1943 delayed until next year.

Call of Duty 4's multiplayer was terrible D:

I agree, and its completely due to the terrible small maps, and ridiculous spawn system that has people spawning where the enemy was spawning 2 seconds before. Makes the gameplay a complete deathmatch. Nobody wants that..

But even with that, its still so massively popular!

Because of the feel of the infantry combat and how the player moves, and how the guns feel and handle. Thats what everyone loves about COD4. I hope they can get that same feel for the next BF, because many will be comparing it to COD4.