Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

[Webs961]

Part 3.5 of our "1943 Reactions" series is a bit nonstandard. After taking a little hiatus, we (read: troybob) are back with yet more thoughts about DICE's 1943 direction. Part 2 of this essay discusses why the varied combat styles found in Battlefield made the franchise an instant hit among FPS gamers.

Diversification is the name of the game.

You know what made Battlefield great? Diversification. The sheer variety of play styles, vehicle types, soldier classes, and tactics meant that the Battlefield series appealed to a broad spectrum of players.

Some aviators out there liked the idea of being able to fly a plane or jet or helicopter while shooting and bombing real people. Some tankers liked the idea of being able to drive a tank in huge tank battles across Aberdeen and blowing people out of windows of buildings. Some first person shooter fans liked the idea of running around in gunfights while having the surreal notion that at any time they could come up against a tank. Sailors even got a kick out of navigating the treacherous waters of Midway in a destroyer and hunting submarines and other warships (especially the prized carrier)...

The Swiss Army Knife soldier classes

But DICE took gameplay diversification one step further. Beyond the broad player-type target audience, diversification was also found in the soldier class system. Some folks enjoyed playing sniper and sitting in a hidey-hole for the entire round while generally making a pest of themselves. They could sit at their computers and watch the action through a scope while drinking a beer and every once in a while get a chance to shoot someone with their rifle. Others were hard charging, ground pounding, chest thumping assault types who enjoyed running into a battle screaming “Leroy Jenkins” and shooting anything that moved. Still others enjoyed the tactical aspect of a support class like engineer or medic, providing support to the frontline grunts on the field...
Continue Reading...

Expect part 2, "Strategy, Tactics, and a Fluid Battlefield," to be posted on Wednesday March 22. After the Troybob essay has been posted in its entirety, we will resume the "1943 Reactions" series with Elxx's notes about the community's reaction to 1943.

Be sure to check out this and other Editorials, posted straight From the Editors' Desks.

[Danny_HR]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

Very good, and a very true article.

Nicely written.

I hate the fact we have only 3 maps, i hate the fact we only have 3 classes, i hate the fact we have unlimited ammo, i hate the fact we have the 'following bullet' effect, i hate the fact we have regenerating health.

And finally, i hate the fact this kind of game will be a part of the BATTLEFIELD franchise.

But will i get it, i probably will. :|:

[{RR}SinisterCaesarSalad]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

Well played, Troy.

[Dangerdog]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

I read that as "Dissatisfaction is the name of the game".

:lol:

[imported_Snazzy]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

I'm more bothered by the lack of diversity concerning vehicles and maps then kits.

Played PR yet troybob?

It's actual forced teamwork, where as even in good old BF1942 any medic can just go rambo with an smg and quickly heal themselves after every firefight.

PR's diverse as well, for example you could be above the clouds dropping laser guided bombs supporting those below or you could be setting up an ambush in a tight alleyway as insurgents.

[RangerXML]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

I think that the newer COD4 model was the greatest thing to happen to player variety ever. On the other hand BF1943 is the biggest step backwards from the company that gave us such sand box game play. I fear what the future holds.

[FPS[SONIC]]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

IMO it's all about the sandbox gameplay where the local group of players sets the tone of the activity. The phenomenal amount of choices as to what kind of experience you can have at each individual spawn was EXCITING. The limitations introduced within these "experiments" eliminiate the one very unique factor which makes Battlefield "Battlefield".

[Moep]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

This is my first post and probably my last :)

Saw this att the official swedish armed forces homepage

http://www.mil.se/sv/Nyheter/centralanyheter/Rekryteringen-tar-nya-dimensioner/

Its about recruitment to the armed forces. Members from DICE visited a live fire exercise for a couple of days to record sound and take pictures (film) for a new game. It also says that DICE turned to the armed forces to get an authentic base for the new game (excuse me for my swenglish but I think you will get the point).

[RangerXML]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

This is my first post and probably my last :)

Saw this att the official swedish armed forces homepage

http://www.mil.se/sv/Nyheter/centralanyheter/Rekryteringen-tar-nya-dimensioner/

Its about recruitment to the armed forces. Members from DICE visited a live fire exercise for a couple of days to record sound and take pictures (film) for a new game. It also says that DICE turned to the armed forces to get an authentic base for the new game (excuse me for my swenglish but I think you will get the point).

I haven't prayed in a long time...

Please be a DICE employee who figured this was the only way to pass a message to the loyal PC crowed...otherwise this means they are taking Bad Co. 2 seriously.

[**L96A1**]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

Please be a DICE employee who figured this was the only way to pass a message to the loyal PC crowed

I would like to think so but it is very very very unlikely. :nod:

[troybob]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

I'm more bothered by the lack of diversity concerning vehicles and maps then kits.

Played PR yet troybob?

It's actual forced teamwork, where as even in good old BF1942 any medic can just go rambo with an smg and quickly heal themselves after every firefight.

PR's diverse as well, for example you could be above the clouds dropping laser guided bombs supporting those below or you could be setting up an ambush in a tight alleyway as insurgents.

I touch on the diversity and maps in the essay - it looks like TGN broke it up.

Real life stuff is why I haven't checked on PR since its most earliest days. I've been meaning to try it. Torrent link anyone?

I would like to contradict myself a little if you all don't mind. Forcing teamwork may be a little harsh wording from my part. Rewarding teamwork would probably be a better phrase for what I think makes a great (retail) game.

Forcing or rewarding teamwork is a mechanism of diminishing returns. It works up to a point.

While PR has an advantage of a loyal realism base, some semi-casual gamers may be put off by the complexity of the systems and certain restrictions imposed in the effort to force teamwork.

While you are correct that medics seem to have a (debatable) advantage by having a decent firearm plus the ability to heal themselves - all players should be able to take part in any part of the battle. In BF2 and in BF1942 any ol' sniper could hop in a tank. That player may see better results (and rewards) if he chooses to be (or be near) an engineer.

While diversity to reward teamwork should be encouraged - placing restrictions on classes and making them overly complicated hinders the adoption of a new game by semi-casuals.

Hope I didn't argue with my original point too much.

[imported_Snazzy]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

No I have not played PR. I've been meaning to download it. Torrent link?

http://www.realitymod.com/downloads.html

Worth checking out my response to you earlier here: http://www.totalgamingnetwork.com/ma...4&postcount=24

I haven't seen what PR has done to the class system, but I would like to state that variety in classes does reach a point of diminishing returns. Not to sound contradictory to my own points, but there are issues with over-specialization as well.

For the conventional armies most spawn kits are variations of the same assault rifles (as they would be assigned in real life to regular forces) with differences in equipment, all catered to support each other in a squad .

Additionally you can also request a whole selection of more specialized kits that are limited to an extent so not everyone goes sniper at once for example.

The first problem with over specialization is that it makes the game harder for a newbie to pick up.

Yeah PR doesn't really compensate for those who don't wish to learn new things or develop skills. It's in no way 'mainstream' or 'casual' but that's what makes it stand out.

The second problem is that there are greedy people out there. Many players don't want to be a team player and don't want to be forced to be a team player. Game designers should make it harder for these people to play, but not impossible.

If someone really just wants to rack up kills in PR on their own they still can, it's just made more challenging which I think is fair.

As an example to the second problem, a sniper should be able to use a tank, but they should be punished for not playing as a team. This is a good balance of variety and functionality.

Well you can usually switch kits without respawning, you just can't be both at the exact same time (not much point anyway). You are pushed towards working as a team, but if you still really want to lonewolf you can if you know how the game works. I consider it an effective balance.

Something like having a "pilot" class is too forceful for a retail game (not a mod) IMO.

Yeah well we don't really know how financially successful PR would be if it was retail (or what implications that would have on it) but it works as a mod.

While PR has an advantage of a loyal realism base, some semi-casual gamers may be put off by the complexity of the systems and certain restrictions imposed in the effort to force teamwork.

True, but there's plenty of games for semi-casual gamers as it is and PR was never supposed to appeal to the masses. For what they restrict they make up for with a far more organized and unique online experience.

While diversity to reward teamwork should be encouraged - placing restrictions on classes and making them overly complicated hinders the adoption of a new game by semi-casuals.

Also true, but that only limits the player base to an extent. PR obviously benefits from the popularity of BF2, and has more active players then a whole list of recent retail titles.

It just doesn't compromise on it's purpose for the sake of attracting more casuals and I appreciate that, it's something only a mod of an already popular retail game could do as well. The developers make it in their spare time out of interest rather then for money, so little is rushed or overlooked.

Hope I didn't argue with my original point too much.

Well you cleared up what you said about 'forced teamwork' which confused me as retail BF games generally don't have that in my opinion.

You give me the impression that you sit on the fence regarding involved and casual game play. I personally can appreciate both if they're done well, for example I'll play some PR then i'll go and play something like Goldeneye Source which is completely different.

[mach1.9pants]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

YOU. THE . MAN.

We want the next in the series BF1942-BF2- (BF3?) 2142 was a side step.

Oh and give us stingers please!

[Dronetek]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

IMO it's all about the sandbox gameplay where the local group of players sets the tone of the activity.

Exactly. This is what sets the BF series apart.

[FPS[SONIC]]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game (Editorial)

Exactly. This is what sets the BF series apart.

I second that :awes