Half-Life Fallout: Battlefield, the games, the franchise - Half-Life Fallout

I am happy for this, my grandpa fought in Guadalcanal and I'd love to see kinda what it was like. He got a purple heart there, shot in the knee and he kept on fighting. Also all I can think of with this game is "boys with toys"

Meh @ battlefield, EA need to rethink the franchise to get my attention, it's been pretty much the same game since 1942

nacho neva-, on Feb 5 2009, 07:29 PM, said:

Are you cereal?

BF2 was a game changer. It was nowhere NEAR what 1942 was! It was one of the most popular games of its time, and the interest lasted for a good long while (I had no problem finding servers for 2+ years).

EA just needs to be a little more innovative. These maps are clearly all re-hashes of older maps (same exact layouts!!!), and from this news it would seem all they are including is older stuff.

I'm just angry because EA has SO MUCH potential here and they are going to waste it? Its not like they can't make Battlefield big-budget games -- they sell insane amounts of copies and are a staple brand.

Maybe I'm really just angry because I want a hybrid Company of Heroes / Battlefield game:

- Squads should only be able to reinforce if the SL is close to a reinforcement truck or forward HQ.
- Force squad cohesion by making players get "stressed out" when they stray too far from commanders (visual effects, effectiveness penalties); make squad leaders subject to votes.
- Give squads veterancy bonuses for following complex commander's orders (based on distance traveled, enemies killed/ encountered, command points captured).
- Make it 128 Players.
- Multiplayer "Campaigns:" maps that rotate in a sequence-of-battle.
- Multiple commanders.
- RTS hybrid with resources gained from strategic points (like COH).
- Destructible environments.
- Ability to call in super-off map weapons or vehicles (e.g. bombing runs, strafing runs, off-map artillery, Jagdpanthers, Tigers).
- Ability for commander + squads to build fortifications.
- You'd have to cap and fortify strategic points as well as defend your base.
- AI could take the place of humans in some squads.
- Players could lead AI squads, or commanders can lock some squads as AI for them to control. Think Brothers-In-Arms squad controls.
- Players could join vehicle queues so that when vehicles spawn they can automatically take one over and have their infantry role filled by AI no more players waiting on helipads or vehicle spawn points.

I mean come on. Thats the "game of the year" for the next decade right there. And that ******* just took me 10 minutes at work to come up with.

THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX EA!!!

(Also, if you're hiring brains for the operation, I'm open to that...)

nacho neva-, on Feb 5 2009, 10:29 AM, said:

I remember playing BF1942 at a PC cafe with a couple friends and there were at least 20 other people in the cafe playing on the same LAN on wake island. My friends didn't really know what to do so they both hopped in a jeep and proceeded to run over anyone that they laid eyes on.

I for one can't wait to play an updated wake island.

Quote

Agreed. BF42 was and is awesome, there's still alot of servers for it.

TangoCharlie, on Feb 5 2009, 09:42 PM, said:

Well thats what im saying, 1942 was awesome, and still is. The simplicity of it all was what made it so great, they added all kinds of crap in the sequels which just wasnt needed and turned them into rapefests

nacho neva-, on Feb 5 2009, 08:56 PM, said:

BF2 is "awesome" in its own right (before EA decided to commence the mudflation and add 1023091029312 expansions).

Its way more frenetic than 1942, but in some ways thats good -- BF2 generally had more action and intensity. 1942 was good, but I remember having more fun with its mods (like the spectacular Desert Combat). Do any of you remember trying to snipe in 1942? Geez louise, it was ridiculous!

That game was great and innovative, but it had its share of problems, too. Lets be sure not to wear our rose-colored hindsight glasses.

swan_song1977, on Feb 5 2009, 09:14 AM, said:

It should be!

64 player battles is the only way to play Battlefield.

I'm not sure how I feel about 1943, I wanted a revamped version of 2 to be honest.

It's been 4 years since BF2, How is it that BF1943 looks exactly the same as BF2 with a WW2 map pack?

The BF1942 demo was great, full game was good, every patch/expansion after made it worse and worse.

I watch this trailer and see 3 maps unchanged from BF1942 but with updated textures and destroyable trees and a new plane. The infantry side of it still looks weak.

The best feature of BF1942 was the artillery. The sniper could mark targets and someone would man the artillery and would have to fire based on those quardenents. It was and still is the best implementation of artillery in a game IMHO.

It really gave a lot of purpose to the scout and was extremely effective when coordinated properly.

Crusty Magic, on Feb 5 2009, 04:10 PM, said:

you're discriminating against me and my xbox people :(

New Wake Island - hell yes!!

I never played 1942, so I am excited about this.

( sic ), on Feb 5 2009, 07:35 PM, said:

thats a sin man, pick it up.