In yet another scintillating series of musings straight From the Editors' Desks, Alex98uk reflects on the announcement of Battlefield 1943 and the community's reaction to the announcement of one of the newest Battlefield titles:
Alex98uk has been a staff member with the Total Gaming Network since its inception in 2006. He currently resides in the United Kingdom and enjoys playing both the Battlefield series and assorted racing titles.
"Reactions of a Franchise Fan" is the first in a five part editorial series about the announcement of Battlefield 1943; the staff have taken up a wide range of positions on the issue, so be sure to check back for new updates From the Editors' Desks.
Be sure to post your thoughts, reactions, and comments.
For a while, we as fans of the Battlefield franchise lived in anticipation of a Battlefield 3 announcement; rumours came down the grapevine, and most of those rumours proved to be true. However, the newest expansion to the line-up, 1943 came from absolutely nowhere, like a slap in the dark. I use the term "slap" because that is exactly what it was, a painful, offensive and downright annoying announcement that left me, along with most of the community, with a rather disappointed and angry feeling in the pit of my stomach.
My first reaction was defensiveness; Surely DICE wouldn't release a whole new Battlefield game with a 24 player only limit? But, as I scrambled for facts, eager to disprove the nay-sayers of TGN, it became apparent that DICE will release a new Battlefield game with a 24 player limit.
I have played Battlefield games since the release of 1942 and whilst I was never really keen on 64 player maps, I know that others are, and I always saw these large battles as a unique selling point of the franchise. The huge amount of content, both created by DICE and community modders was great and, again, made the game stand out from other titles such as Frontlines Fuel of War. However, 1943 seems to have bucked this trend and has decided that a middle of the road style approach would be best: Smaller numbers of players, smaller maps, less content and more cartoony, less gritty graphics. Well, perhaps it’s a bit more skewed toward console play than a “middle of the road” approach.
Continue Reading...
My first reaction was defensiveness; Surely DICE wouldn't release a whole new Battlefield game with a 24 player only limit? But, as I scrambled for facts, eager to disprove the nay-sayers of TGN, it became apparent that DICE will release a new Battlefield game with a 24 player limit.
I have played Battlefield games since the release of 1942 and whilst I was never really keen on 64 player maps, I know that others are, and I always saw these large battles as a unique selling point of the franchise. The huge amount of content, both created by DICE and community modders was great and, again, made the game stand out from other titles such as Frontlines Fuel of War. However, 1943 seems to have bucked this trend and has decided that a middle of the road style approach would be best: Smaller numbers of players, smaller maps, less content and more cartoony, less gritty graphics. Well, perhaps it’s a bit more skewed toward console play than a “middle of the road” approach.
Continue Reading...
Alex98uk has been a staff member with the Total Gaming Network since its inception in 2006. He currently resides in the United Kingdom and enjoys playing both the Battlefield series and assorted racing titles.
"Reactions of a Franchise Fan" is the first in a five part editorial series about the announcement of Battlefield 1943; the staff have taken up a wide range of positions on the issue, so be sure to check back for new updates From the Editors' Desks.
Be sure to post your thoughts, reactions, and comments.