VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

[Dronetek]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

Wait what? Steam isn't a game engine,

Yeah, I meant source engine. :laugh:

A bunch? BF1943 is the only one so far, if BFBC2 is anything like the original it won't be a "short" game. And DICE has other projects in the works too.

Heroes and 1943 are the first 2 that resemble the sort of thing valve did with the Source engine. It sort of reminds me of TF2 and Left 4 Dead.

Anyway, you've been cheerleading these new console games from the start. We all know you love the console ports.

[iQue]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

I haven't been cheerleading any of the games... maybe BFH then but that's because it's actually a good and solid game. I just don't want people to jump to conclusions, and immediately discard BF1943 as a horrible console port when that's not the whole story. Believe me, I don't think I'll buy it in its current state...

TF2 and L4D small console ports? Psht, more of the opposite. Developed for PC and then ported over, the PC versions have constant updates and bug fixes while the consoles get jack. I can understand your point, but picking Valve was a bad example since, quite honestly, they are one of the best developers to support their games lately.

You could think Valve were a little weak with content at the release at the games, but they totally make it up by releasing more new content than you could ever ask for.

[Vreki]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

Yeah, I meant source engine. :laugh:

Heroes and 1943 are the first 2 that resemble the sort of thing valve did with the Source engine. It sort of reminds me of TF2 and Left 4 Dead.

Anyway, you've been cheerleading these new console games from the start. We all know you love the console ports.

Sorry, weren't you against that approach? As far as I can see, you have just compared BF1943 to two of the most innovative shooters released this millennium?

More of this and less Call of Battlefield 117.

[Levente]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

this interview is sad, it really shows this patrick guy dunno sh it why was bf epic, just read the fu king title dam nit look it says : B A T T L E F I E L D
means large maps and many players wrecking havoc. this is not ****ty COD or CS, this is BATTLEFIELD , read it as many times until you dont understand. these excuses are pathetic i cant belive it.:cry:

[5m0k3]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

64 players is what got me in to the whole battlefield scene in the first place. I remember looking at the box of 1942 when it was hot and reading the back about 64 players. I was like I got to tried this out!

Having different fights with vehicles/infantry around the whole map and having the option to join which ever I liked is what made Battlefield unique to me. Ended up getting vietnam,bf2,2142 with all the extras after that.

So yeah, 64p is a big selling point for the game imo. I will be happy if they at least put it up to 32 players for the pc.

[Greasy_Mullet]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

"PL: Not necessarily. But more games. The thing is, all these games are directed at different segments of the market. Hardcore gamers are into every section of the market. What you have to realise is the hardcore gamers are in most cases a minority."

I call BS... TOTAL BS. If that were the case then WOW, CS, CoD, and many other games directed at hardcore gamers would be a failure. Instead they are the leaders!

What an absoulte pathetic statement from Dice that shows just how disconnected with reality they are. If that argument held any water then there would be HUGE buzz around Heroes when in fact there is very little.... and the darn game is even FREE!!! You can not give that trash away!

As a battlefield fan I am very disapointed with the direction Dice has chosen to go. As a 1942 fan (My fav game of all time) I am even more upset by this dumbed down game which is nothing but a tease of what COULD have, SHOULD have been.

Shame on Dice, here is to hoping they get a darn clue.

[troybob]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

One of the selling points of BF1942 IIRC was something like "you will never have the same experiences twice guaranteed"

Another notable quote from DICE before 1942 was released (but after the wake demo) was "5 minutes to learn but a lifetime to master"

[(BG)Patton]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

i believe what dice is trying to do is to test the waters and see if the battlefield community wants an updated bf1942 game. they didnt want to spend all of thier time and money making the full 1943 game so they crapped out 3 maps just to see if there was a desire for a full 1943 game. i think once dice sees that the fans want and need an updated bf1942 they will jump on it right away. or at least this is what ive been telling myself... please dice, dont pull a medal of honor airborne on this one...

**** the consoles

[G-Snake]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

Wow, seems like Dice has inherited the EA PR people, absolutely nothing but lip service.

It's pretty ignorant/arrogant to suggest that most of the community doesn't want to play on servers larger than 24 players, because apparently a good portion, or even the majority, believe that 24 players is just too little for a battlefield game.

But what do we, the community and consumer know about anything? No point in taking advice from the people who buy their products.

[imported_Master Shake]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

I still like his "I feel a little sad sometimes when people say they're lazy or they're not listening to the fans. Yes of course we keep track of what the forums are saying. I can't say anything really, but we have plans. Definitely big plans. The fans don't need to worry." Blah,blah, BS.

Get a clue Patrick the PC BF community has been "Sad" for quite sometime now with DICE and there wishy-washy interviews and crap sandwich games like BFH and BF1943 and complete lack of information regarding the next PC 64 Player Minimum large maps Battlefield ejacula-paloosa BF 3 or what ever.
Tell us what is coming for us and when is projected, what is so super secret? What Frostbite can't handle it and you have to write a new engine? It's going to be going on 5 years since BF2 and 3 1/2 years since the very nice BF2 Super Mod BF2142, PS you could have held off on putting out 2142 for at least a year or so from when you did, we probably would not be so ornery now...the booster packs did not really help either but hey you made a quick buck! I don't think that will work again especially with that piece of crap EA downloader bs.

I am really keeping an eye on AMA3 and Operation Flashpoint 2 Dragon Rising the clock is ticking DICE.

AMA3 - [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv2-SMgxnls&feature=related[/media]

OPF2 DR- [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-odAncq8bI[/media]

Sorry if posting links to other games makes you "Sad" Pat..can I call you Pat?

[yeoldehomer]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

Why are they still talking like they were six months ago? The whole cryptic "yeah we've got big plans, but we can't tell you" crap is getting really old. If "big plans" has amounted to BF1943 as the next "hardcore experience", I've lost all faith in this franchise. I was hoping that BC2 would amount to something "hardcore", but I've lost any trust in that seeing as DICE seem to be peddling 1943 as "hardcore".

They're right that "hardcore PC gamers" will play anything. They're dead wrong in thinking that they'll play it frequently and enjoy it for an extensive period of time. Games like BF2, WoW, Counter-Strike, and other epic titles sell so many copies and have such a large player base because they are designed in such a way that people can play them for years. You can't keep crapping out short-lived mockeries of games and expect people to stay loyal to your brand. You might make a quick buck here and there off it, but people will gradually lose interest. It's the same with music. You can put out 6 albums a year, but if they're s**t, people will stop coming to your shows.

If you sort through the bull**** in that article, DICE are essentially saying, "yeah, we know this won't make the hardcore PC guys happy now, but hell... you're not that larger percentage of our profits anyway... sorry". Freakin' sellouts.

There better be some news about BC2 soon, and it better be good. The folks from Codemasters are releasing a stack of promotional material for Operation Flashpoint 2 soon, and it's getting more attention from me than anything DICE are trying to sell.

[Travers1111]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

AGH! WTF?
64 players is one of the MAIN reasons battlefield was battlefield!
Sure, games like counter-strike or team fortress may only have 30 players and feel epic, but can we please stop and spot the differences?!?

Teamfortress 2:-------Battlefield 2:
~30 players------------~64 players
Feels full at 30---------Feels full at 64
Very small maps--------TREMENDOUS MAPS!


Can you spot the difference and one of the defining characteristics of battlefield? And what's all this crap about poor performance in servers and never full? Look up the server list, some of the most popular servers have between 48-64 players in them the majority of the time. And laggy 64 players servers? Maybe when 1942 was released, but I have yet to be in a laggy 64 player server with less than 150 ping.

Never mind, I'm waiting for BF3, not this Heroes and 1943 crap. It's like being force fed things we "want" when the things we had before were what we loved, don't you think?

[<TB> Zaney]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

Wtf? have that patrick guy even played Battlefield? 64players=Battlefield.
This game is almost CoD soon. Screw 1943, I'm waiting for BF3.

[Minmaster]

Re: VideoGamer.com Battlefield 1943 Interview

might as well ignore these console/casual games and look into ARMA2 or OP F2 until BF3 is out...