Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

[jesus]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Okay, I broke down and watched the trailer (*peeks over shoulder to make sure boss isn't watching *) and I'd have to agree with BIFF, that does look farkin' awesome. But the 24 player thing is going to be a deal-breaker. Notice how they showed all the aircraft (yay for being raped by aircraft ); they showed three bombers at the end, and various fighters throughout. Now assume that you're going to have just two bombers and one fighter. Each bomber in BF1942 could hold two people, so we'll just stick with that for now. That's five people up in the air at once. Now, throughout that whole map, there will be a total of seven of your guys on the ground. If you've played Guadalcanal for 1942, you'd know that seven ground troops would make for one HELL of a boring game. So if the aircraft are going to be as numerous as they seem to be showing in this game, then either it's basically going to be a dogfighting sim where you'll come across more aircraft than you will tanks or infantry, or the maps will have to be small enough to make it seem like 7-9 enemies on the ground is a lot. And 9 is not even a lot on Camp Gibraltar. =/

That 24 player thing is really going to kill this game for the PC market, far more than any time-period setting ever would.

That is, unless it's free. Like I said, when something is free, you can lower your standards. However, if this game costs any money at all then it will be a poor excuse for a retail Battlefield game. It will be treated the same way the console BF games get treated when they're compared to the PC versions, and BF2 will still remain the king of all Battlefield games.

[BIFF EXPLODER]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

24 player is the main thing that makes me wonder if the game is free to download like BF:H

that and this i said above:

BF 1943 says: Xbox LIVE Arcade, PlayStation Network and on PC for download

and BF:BC says: PlayStation®Store, Xbox LIVE™ Marketplace and on the PC.

[jesus]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

24 player is the main thing that makes me wonder if the game is free to download like BF:H

that and this i said above:

BF 1943 says: Xbox LIVE Arcade, PlayStation Network and on PC for download

and BF:BC says: PlayStation®Store, Xbox LIVE™ Marketplace and on the PC.

And it makes sense, at least, for the PC, but don't the consoles have to pay for everything? Including map packs that the PC gets for free? (CoD4, for example)

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

That is, unless it's free. Like I said, when something is free, you can lower your standards. However, if this game costs any money at all then it will be a poor excuse for a retail Battlefield game. It will be treated the same way the console BF games get treated when they're compared to the PC versions, and BF2 will still remain the king of all Battlefield games.

Good point, but that does beg the question; why waste their time on half-arsed free games instead of making one spectacular game and charging full price? Make this game 64 players and give us more maps and I'd gladly shell out $50 for it, without even a second thought. Unless they're going the micro-transaction route and are releasing games piecemeal that you buy for $10 at a time.

This announcement has me both excited, confused, and irritated all in one. I'm exfusitated. :weo:

[Skaggy]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Nice to see some boats.

And although the 24 player limit seems dissapointing, I mostly find myself playing in 16-32 BF2 servers anyway. A large >100 player experience would be immense though.

[BIFF EXPLODER]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

And it makes sense, at least, for the PC, but don't the consoles have to pay for everything? Including map packs that the PC gets for free? (CoD4, for example)

i dont know about the consoles, thats the part that gives me doubts, i have no idea what live arcade and playstation network are, but in in bad company 2 they speak of PlayStation Store and Xbox LIVE Marketplace

i'm so fonfusionated!!!:dead:

[jesus]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Good point, but that does beg the question; why waste their time on half-arsed free games instead of making one spectacular game and charging full price? Make this game 64 players and give us more maps and I'd gladly shell out $50 for it, without even a second thought. Unless they're going the micro-transaction route and are releasing games piecemeal that you buy for $10 at a time.

This announcement has me both excited, confused, and irritated all in one. I'm exfusitated. :weo:

I know, it's like common sense doesn't exist any more. All they need to do is look at what made the PC BF games so epic and just reproduce that formula again, but do it even better.

We're going backwards here, and it's a real shame, too, considering our computers are so powerful nowadays and capable of so much more.

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Nice to see some boats.

And although the 24 player limit seems dissapointing, I mostly find myself playing in 16-32 BF2 servers anyway. A large >100 player experience would be immense though.

Do you play mostly citymap servers? I used to play 32 player servers for vehicles and, while fun, aren't nearly as epic-feeling as 64 player maps. 64 player maps allow for the wide-open vehicle combat I so <3 in BF, and with only 24 people that feeling wouldn't/couldn't exist. If you're talking Karkand, then yeah, 24 would be enough (well, not on 64 player Karkand, even that gets boring with only 24 people), but for vehicle maps, 48-64 players are when they start getting the most fun. Of course, an even worse experience is a low population on a large map, because in BF2 that pretty much means all the aircraft are going around the map trying to see which one can rape the lowly ground vehicles first. :cry:

Oh, and Skaggy, your sig creeps me out something awful! :laugh:

I know, it's like common sense doesn't exist any more. All they need to do is look at what made the PC BF games so epic and just reproduce that formula again, but do it even better.

We're going backwards here, and it's a real shame, too, considering our computers are so powerful nowadays and capable of so much more.

Agree 100%.

[Minmaster]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Okay, I broke down and watched the trailer (*peeks over shoulder to make sure boss isn't watching *) and I'd have to agree with BIFF, that does look farkin' awesome. But the 24 player thing is going to be a deal-breaker. Notice how they showed all the aircraft (yay for being raped by aircraft ...at least the Flak should be more effective than 'smart' AA missiles *crosses fingers*); they showed three bombers at the end, and various fighters throughout. Now assume that you're going to have just two bombers and one fighter per team. Each bomber in BF1942 could hold two people, so we'll just stick with that for now. That's five people up in the air at once. Now, throughout that whole map, there will be a total of seven of your guys on the ground. If you've played Guadalcanal for 1942, you'd know that seven ground troops would make for one HELL of a boring game. So if the aircraft are going to be as numerous as they seem to be showing in this game, then either it's basically going to be a dogfighting sim where you'll come across more aircraft than you will tanks or infantry, or the maps will have to be small enough to make it seem like 7-9 enemies on the ground is a lot. And 9 is not even a lot on Camp Gibraltar. =/

That 24 player thing is really going to kill this game for the PC market, far more than any time-period setting ever would.

it could be the maps are shrunken down (compared to 1942) to accommodate less players and keep the action close and frequent. as someone mentioned, i think the bombers are equivalent of commander artillery strikes, so i wouldn't count the bomber crew as part of 24 players.

bah, but i hate getting air raped on wake, and it doesn't seem like that's going to go away with this new game. ground pounding on wake is no fun.... those AA turrets better pack some punch.

[jesus]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Nice to see some boats.

And although the 24 player limit seems dissapointing, I mostly find myself playing in 16-32 BF2 servers anyway. A large >100 player experience would be immense though.

It's fine if you prefer playing with smaller player limits, but smaller player limits is always possible. Just look at BF2. The maps support 64, 32 and 16. I'd rather have 128 player limits, with the maps being able to be reduced to support 64, 32, 16, or whatever.

Unfortunately, that's not backwards-compatible. You can't take a map designed for 24 players and then raise the limit to 64 and expect it to still work.

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

it could be the maps are shrunken down (compared to 1942) to accommodate less players and keep the action close and frequent. as someone mentioned, i think the bombers are equivalent of commander artillery strikes, so i wouldn't count the bomber crew as part of 24 players.

bah, but i hate getting air raped on wake, and it doesn't seem like that's going to go away with this new game. ground pounding on wake is no fun.... those AA turrets better pack some punch.

If you take away the insta-death-from-afar that is BF2's helicopter TV missile and you don't have aircraft that can go from one end of the map to the other in 4 seconds and have the ability to highlight all the ground targets and AA emplacements, and don't have a bunch of splash damage on the cannons, along with AA that actually takes skill to use and isn't dependant on some automated tracking system or dodgy hitbox malarkey, aircraft can be completely balanced. AA was great in BF1942, and even though the pilots could know beforehand (by checking the minimap) whether or not an AA station was occupied, it at least made it possible to shoot the damned planes down. You didn't have like 2 seconds to do so before the aircraft flew out of lock range and there were no flares, so pilots had to actually fear the AA, and with practice you could get better at aiming the AA.

Kind of like the Rorsch Kz-27 AA in BF2142, where you wouldn't be able to maim it from far off, but if a gunship is stupid enough to linger close to the base for too long he's going to get smoked.

[BIFF EXPLODER]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

it could be the maps are shrunken down (compared to 1942) to accommodate less players and keep the action close and frequent. as someone mentioned, i think the bombers are equivalent of commander artillery strikes, so i wouldn't count the bomber crew as part of 24 players.

bah, but i hate getting air raped on wake, and it doesn't seem like that's going to go away with this new game. ground pounding on wake is no fun.... those AA turrets better pack some punch.

plane raping on wake was never much of a problem in 1942 i think..... i'm not sure because it was along time ago but i'm almost sure it wasnt :P

we could always take down planes using the vehicle mounted machineguns and sink the japanese carrier if it became a problem anywho.

and the AA in 1942 was very effective compared to BF2, VERY VERY effective :P

[=98=]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Probably a testbed for the frostbite engine on a PC platform.

[Cicchetti]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

I guess the game seems fun for the mean time. Where is are PC exclusive BF.

[iQue]

Re: Battlefield 1943: Pacific Officially Announced

Probably a testbed for the frostbite engine on a PC platform.

Something like that.

If they do release it for free, it would be a great business idea though, since it will get players excited for BC2. I don't know about the rest of you, but BF:1943 looks freaking awesome. It's just the player cap and "match-making system" that bothers me.