Battlefield 1943: Pacific

Is it a sequal to BF: Bad Company or a return to PC??????

http://pc.ign.com/articles/951/951432p1.html

IGN wrote:New WWII Battlefield Rumoured
Battlefield 1943: Pacific to be shown at NYCC?
by Martin Robinson, IGN UK

UK, February 5, 2009 - EA's Battlefield series could be making a return to the Second World War with a new game titled Battlefield 1943: Pacific rumoured to be making a debut appearance at this week's New York Comic Con.

Videogaming24/7 has been doing the detective work, receiving confirmation that the game is real and will be officially breaking cover later this week. EA CEO John Riccitiello recently announced that a sequel to Battlefield: Bad Company is in production, though long-term fans of the series have been pining for a return to the game's multiplayer roots.

We've reached out to EA for confirmation of Battlefield 1943: Pacific – while we await confirmation pass the time by reading reviews for Battlefield: Bad Company and the series' last excursion to WWII, Battlefield 1942.

Don't get too excited Sarge I am sure its just a repackage of BF42, but it only includes the pacific maps, ooo and they broke the sever browser. ;-)

From Planet Battlefield web site.

Another source, Ownage.nl, reports Battlefield 1943 Pacific is for PC, Xbox 360, and Playstation 3.

Also rumored to use the same sandbox game engine

This was on Planet Battlefield this morning.

🎉 for back to the PC
🙁 Limited to 24 players
for 3 (three???????) friggin' maps????? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? I smell multiple "expansion packs" or Battlefield 1944: Europe (again with 3 maps) around the corner.

PBF wrote:EA DICE officially announced today Battlefield: Bad Company 2 for Playstation 3, Xbox 360, and PC. The game is expected to be released next Winter. Also in this press release is Battlefield 1943, which will be available this Summer. Both games use the Frostbite engine.

DICE, an Electronic Arts Inc. studio (NASDAQ:ERTS), today announced Battlefield: Bad Company 2™, the sequel to last year’s blockbuster title. In this installment, the Bad Company crew again find themselves in the heart of the action, where they must use every weapon and vehicle at their disposal to survive. The action unfolds with unprecedented intensity, introducing a level of fervor to vehicular warfare never before experienced in a modern warfare action game. To get ready for the assault this winter, players can prepare for action in Battlefield 1943™, an all-new multiplayer game available this summer via PlayStation®Store, Xbox LIVE™ Marketplace and on the PC.

In Battlefield: Bad Company 2, the ‘B’ company fight their way through snowy mountaintops, dense jungles and dusty villages. With a heavy arsenal of deadly weapons and a slew of vehicles to aid them, the crew set off on their mission and they are ready to blow up, shoot down, blast through, wipe out and utterly destroy anything that gets in their way. Total destruction is the name of the game, delivered as only the DICE next generation Frostbite™ engine can. Either online or offline, enemies will soon learn there is nowhere to hide. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 will be available for the Xbox 360® videogame and entertainment system, the PLAYSTATION®3 computer entertainment system and the PC.

Using the same Frostbite™ engine, Battlefield 1943 takes players back to WWII. The game offers endless hours of 24 player multiplayer action over three classic and tropic locations; Wake Island, Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima. Delivering the award-winning through-the-gun and vehicle warfare online experience DICE is best recognized for, Battlefield 1943 will have players battling in ruthless aerial dog fights and intense trench combat. Players can see the game in action at New York Comic Con (Booth #1441) from February 6th-8th.

“Bad Company 2 takes everything that players liked in the original and ups the ante – more vehicles, more destruction and more team play,” said Karl Magnus Troedsson, Executive Producer Battlefield Franchise, DICE. “Battlefield 1943 is a new take on a blast from the past classic coming to life with brand new technology that we’re eager to get into players hands.”

Sarge wrote:This was on Planet Battlefield this morning.

Using the same Frostbite™ engine, Battlefield 1943 takes players back to WWII. The game offers endless hours of 24 player multiplayer action over three classic and tropic locations; Wake Island, Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima. Delivering the award-winning through-the-gun and vehicle warfare online experience DICE is best recognized for, Battlefield 1943 will have players battling in ruthless aerial dog fights and intense trench combat. Players can see the game in action at New York Comic Con (Booth #1441) from February 6th-8th.

Wait, so I was joking in my first post, is this proving me right?? Three maps we have seen before on a different engine than 42, but an engine that we have seen before.

I guess all we are waiting for is to figure out how they broke the server browser.

It's an engine that we've seen before but never played as it was console only to this point.

The three map issue really bugs me and will until I hear that it is priced accordingly. And by accordingly, I do not mean at $49.95. A new game with 3 Maps = $20.

I'm guessing that the Naval aspect is going to be left out of the game as well....or an expansion pack.

RPS has a small article including a short movie.

I noticed that it had the F4U Corsair (which is a ++ imo)
Bombing run in place of artillery strike maybe?

Could 24 players be limited to consoles?????

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/02/05...1943-confirmed/

http://www.viddler.com/explore/Joystiq/videos/433/

Watch the video. Watch the tree's. I think I just got a chubby.

Wood for Wood......

ROFL! Yep!

I found something interesting.

Battlefield 1943 will be available on Xbox LIVE Arcade, PlayStation Network and on PC for download.

You read that right, for download only. Sounds like they are trying to push that piece of crap downloader again.

I also think this may be why BF Heroes was delayed. I get the feeling they are going to do the microtransactions in this game.

Still, I'm excited......

At CT we have fake credit card numbers and users accounts and are encouraged to download, lose, reinstall and generally mess with the EA Webstore then report issues, this has been going on for a year now (around the time Crysis came out) is when we started messing with it.

It remains ongoing open testing.

A 10 minute video on PBF

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/

Some highlights.....

# Destructible environments
# Available on Xbox Live, Playstation Network, and PC download
# Classic Battlefield multiplayer with cutting-edge technology
# Gameplay wise more like Bad Company
# Pricing similar to Braid (Currently 1500 MS Points = $15)
# 350 MB download on Xbox Live
# Max 24 players
# 2 armies - US Marines & Japanese Imperial Army
# Conquest game mode only
# Ability to level up, but won't give you weapons or abilities
# 3 maps with 5 capture points each
# Japanese army can melee with a samurai sword
# No unlocks but customizable load outs
# Kits with variety of weapons

A couple of thoughts about this. At $15, it's making EA a huge profit because of the lack of CD distribution.

24 player limit is 100% because it is a Console Port. If ever there was a reason to pick PC games over Console, it's because Consoles can't handle large multiplayer games. It won't be long before someone hacks the PC to 32 or more.

The way EA/DICE has a habit of taking years to actually release additional patches or addon's, 3 maps may be all we get. I imagine someone will figure out how to make custom maps for the PC game, but like all BF games before it, this will be a frustrating cluster fuck.

The destructible environment looks interesting. The foliage still isn't as dense as Eve of Destruction and it's a mod.

Still, Chubby......

One thing that is not a rumor. EA is firmly entrenched in SecuROM now. I've found it on 3 computers here at home... Crysis, Crysis Warhead, and Sims2 expansion packs. Also EA Downloader installs and runs in your startup without permission until your firewall blocks it next boot.

Bioshock via steam does indeed have it, and when I cleaned it out on daughters computer it killed the registration keys.

Looks like my BF days are at an end.

Hmmmm. . .

Oh well hell. . .pretty much a mixed bag already, isn't it? 3 maps, maximum 24 players. . .I don't know that falling trees and fully destructible buildings compensate for that. If you think a bit, us groundpounders DEPEND on those buildings for partial protection from bombing raids, arty and tanks/apcs. Seems to me a fully destructible building is a net minus. I always preferred playing with about 40-48 ppl per map too.

No unlocks=good.

Anyone see anything about spotting/squads/commanders yet?

And how much are they talking about selling this for? $15 is a very reasonable price, and I imagine they'll sell a few map packs. When the game starts out at $15, it's less of an outrage, but you'll still have the same old map-pack problem: will everyone get them?

I hope they don't go too realistic with the weapons. I'd hate to be stuck with those four foot long Arisaka bolt-action rifles every time I'm on the Japanese side. Those won't be fun. . .

I saw this q&a with one of the developers this morning. It has lots of good info. I've quoted the entire thing below, but here is the direct link.

http://www.gustavhalling.com/2009/02/08/battlefield-1943-qa/

he also goes "in depth on ammo replenishment, and soldier classes here:
http://www.gustavhalling.com/2009/02/09/ba...-1943-in-depth/

Gustav Halling wrote:Battlefield 1943 Q&A

I spent my weekend answering questions for the Swedish Battlefield community ,and now I’d like to give all non-Swedish speakers the chance to learn more in-depth what Battlefield 1943 is all about!

- Is there any support for clan matches?
- Why a 24-player limit?
- How does the replenish ammo function work?

These are questions that have been answered by producer Patrick Liu in his blog and by me at BF2.se. Don’t hesitate to ask new questions in the comments!

Q&A

Will there be any ships in the game?
BF1943 have 2 hangar ships and LCVP’s.

Is there any support for clan matches?
There will be support for private matches in BF1943.

How many kits will there be in BF1943?
We have narrowed down the number of kits to 3 kits that enables you to do almost everything that you could do in BF1942!

* Infantry - SMG, Hand grenades, Anti-tank rifle and a lethal Wrench!
* Rifleman - Semi-automatic Rifle (Garand etc), Rifle Grenade, Hand grenades, knife
* Scout - Bolt-action Sniper Rifle, Expack (C4), Pistol and sword/knife


Infantry and Scout seem to have some kind of anti-vehicle weapon, what about Rifleman?

Rifleman have his Rifle Grenade rifle that does damage to vehicles!

Is BF1943 a “Internet browser” game?
No, BF1943 is not a Internet browser game, it’s a download-only game on X360, PS3 & PC.

Is there any stats system?
Yes, BF1943 will use a stats system very much like the one in Bad Company.

Is there any medic packs or ammo crates on the levels?
No BF1943 won’t have either.

* BF1943 uses a regenerating health system
* BF1943 uses a replenish ammo system

The ammo system is balanced with reload and overheat systems. You still will have clips with 5/8/30 rounds that needs reloading.

Expacks and AT rockets are coming in “bundles”, you can fire the amount of rockets you have pretty fast, then a tweaked timer kicks in to reload the bundle!

All this together will give you an gaming experience where you don’t need to run around looking for crates and can focus on what’s fun, pwning enemies! =)

How does the Air Raid work?
The Air strike can be called in by any one person and it’s controlled by that person!

How does the recoil and deviation system work?
BF1943 uses my new weapon design that instead of randomizing bullets in a big circle as in many other games, your bullets will instead “follow” after each other in a pattern.
This doesn’t mean that it’s easier to use the weapons but they will be easier to learn, control and master!

Is there any unlocks?
We wanted to give all players the same experience from start and that’s why we will not use unlocks but give you all the weapons and gadgets from the start!
But our stats system will give you things to hunt for instead!

Why does BF1943 have a 24 players?
64 players is awesome but will all good there is some hurting also. The 24 player limit is not about us being lazy, but the experience of a massive battlefield is necessary not bound to the amount of players!
We have also optimized the layout and size of the maps to compensate for the 24 player limit.

And as many of you remember most clan wars where player with 8vs8 or 12vs12 and what we have seen many of the 64-player servers are mostly half-full or having lack of performance.

Beside these design decisions there are technical limitations. There are very restricted bandwidth limits on the consoles and we are networking a lot more than 24 players:
- 24 players are networked
- Almost as many physics driven vehicles with movable and destroyable parts
- All destruction, if a wall is being destroyed on one client we need to update it on all the others, otherwise we could end up with players hiding behind non-existent walls.

If we removed all destruction and all our vehicles we could have more players. But no other game gives you the wide gaming experience we have!

I cant see any minimap on the preview videos, is it removed?
BF1943 will have a minimap at release, it just haven’t been added yet =)
The videos you see are recorded from a pre-alpha build and is not always the final version!

Has anything been done about base raping for collecting stats?
Yes, BF1943 uses an anti-base-rape system that makes it impossible to get any stats inside enemy bases!

—————-

Interesting:

Two thoughts.

There are very restricted bandwidth limits on the consoles

The truth, but why limit PC's at the expense of Consoles.

What he said....

BF1943 uses an anti-base-rape system that makes it impossible to get any stats inside enemy bases!

What that really means....

"While we have taken away all points inside the uncapturable bases, it is still possible to torment and punish your enemy providing the Griefer in all of you a much better playing experience.

Sorry, had to be cynical.....


Chubby!

Personally I prefer servers near 24 players, more than that and its too much, less and it can be boring. I hated the 3 map size thing in BF2, I never knew where shit was on that map size.

I don't like the regenerative health and ammo though.

Not sure what to think about the deviation thing.

The regenerative thing I don't think will be that bad. COD has regenerative health and that seems to work ok. Getting the timing right for the ammo timer may be a bit tricky but it certainly beats hoping that the heavy gunner next to you notices you spamming "I NEED AMMO" 900 times or that the commander deigns to drop a crate.

Certainly seems a bit arcadish, and I see what the guy is saying about the environmental damage being a bandwidth hog because you have to update everyone as to the status of each piece. If the maps are small, 24 won't be too bad. I prefer BF games of 36, but played often enough at 24 or less that I don't think it will bug me.

This seems like something that I'll spend $15 and see where it goes. I don't feel so bad if it sucks and I spent that amount of money vs. $50.

Sarge wrote:Beside these design decisions there are technical limitations. There are very restricted bandwidth limits on the consoles and we are networking a lot more than 24 players:
- 24 players are networked
- Almost as many physics driven vehicles with movable and destroyable parts
- All destruction, if a wall is being destroyed on one client we need to update it on all the others, otherwise we could end up with players hiding behind non-existent walls.

If we removed all destruction and all our vehicles we could have more players. But no other game gives you the wide gaming experience we have!

Bah! We get more bling, and less game experience. We're moving backwards for the sake of cool FX. 🙁

I liked games of around 40 players. It let our squad do our own thing and contribute to the win without needing to be everywhere at once and doing everything.

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/45234.html?type=flv

This is a really good video showing the gameplay. I like what I see. Reminds me of an updated BFV with the icons. The enemy is always Red Flags, Names. I prefer that.

Notice the buildings on Fire at 1:36. That looks incredible. Also, the center reticule is back. Another thing he talks about is the Bunkers are safe zones. They can not be destroyed. That makes me feel a little better about the destructive buildings.

Atomm wrote:http://www.gametrailers.com/player/45234.html?type=flv

This is a really good video showing the gameplay. I like what I see. Reminds me of an updated BFV with the icons. The enemy is always Red Flags, Names. I prefer that.

Notice the buildings on Fire at 1:36. That looks incredible. Also, the center reticule is back. Another thing he talks about is the Bunkers are safe zones. They can not be destroyed. That makes me feel a little better about the destructive buildings.

The building on fire does look great. overall, It doesn't look more realistic than BF2. It looks GOOD, but it looks too bright, colorful, "arcade-y". That's not real important, but I wonder if it represents a move away from realism. I just now noticed that this is a video of the console version.

It looks like fun, but I still wish it had at least 32-40 players. I didn't notice anything about squads in the video. I don't know how useful squads will be when there are only 12 players per side, but if they do away with squads, they're killing a teamplay element I loved. Also, I didn't see spotting, or the comma-rose, or anything about a commander. I guess when you only have 12 ppl per team, they all better be shooting stuff.

This smells like a step backward. Pretty, fun, but not as deep, with less shelf-life. It looks like BFV updated, not BF2 updated.

Getting rid of the commander would not be a bad thing, IMHO

I know there is a way to call in a bomber strike. It will send 3 bombers in formation to hit a specific target. That could be commander specific or maybe it's like CoD4 and you get extra perks based on your immediate accomplishments.

I love the look. It actually looks like there is foliage. Now, does it play the same as the other battlefields? I doubt it based on what we've read about the way the bullets follow each other in a pattern formation. That alone will make it different than the stuff before BF43. As long as it's an improvement over BF2's stupid random deviation, I'm all for it.

seems much more arcady... i.e. skill will be balanced by pure luck.

I immensely prefered the arcade style gameplay of vanilla BF1942 over vanilla BF2 for one big reason: it was more fun. BF1942 mods made it even better, though I concede there are mods for BF2 that I now enjoy almost as much.

Us -=NC=- guys used to get into trouble with our girlfriends and wives because we couldn't stop playing BF1942, Battlegroup42 and Desert Combat Final almost every single night. However that same magic just was not there with BF2 or BF2142 - those games were geared more towards matches and competition than they were for casual gaming fun. We burned out on those and eventually lost most of the new recruits that we picked up on our ranked servers.

I'm just glad to hear that BF1943 is only going to be $15. I do wish the max player limit was higher than 24 - at least 30, 40 would be perfect. The best thing about Battlefield was the total chaos from having a server full of guys killing each other. The more merrier. 64 players was cool, but those servers were expensive and you have to be a team of at least 100 active members to be able to keep it full all the time. Most 64 player servers were mostly empty. We had one and got it up to 60 players on only 2 occasions. Plus if you expanded the map size, it kind of defeated the purpose of having more players - it just spread everyone out more.

I agree with you about the appeal of 42 being much higher than bf2 ever was. We were all addicted, we were all there every night. BF2, we were all there most Fridays, but that was all.

Bubbaspanky wrote:I agree with you about the appeal of 42 being much higher than bf2 ever was. We were all addicted, we were all there every night. BF2, we were all there most Fridays, but that was all.

Conversely, While I played BF42, Counterstrike, Day of Defeat, Firearms, Quake 2, Unreal Tournament, etc - the game that got me to join a clan was BF2.

I've been keeping quiet on this thread because I'm not all that hep on BF to begin with. Noway I'm going to be drawn into their expansion pack crap again, and if I ever see wake island again I think I will gag.

Last two EA titles I bought had SecuRom in them, and since they won't have a CD to force you into keeping the disk in, I'm sure they will F you with the downloadable content *somehow*.

If you buy this thing, they will just keep you on the hook for more pay for play maps until they can muster up BF3. They could give this thing away for free and still make a billion bucks. No thanks on this one. As Doc sez, its stepping backwards and I don't trust their copy protection schemes whatsoever anymore.

HA! Who's the cynic now - HUH?

Lexx I was that way on CoD4 when it came out, bought it day 1 and thought it sucked, dumped it 3 days later to a clan member in Canada.
Got bored a few months ago and from first release to 1.7 it's a whole different game and love it now.

I'll favorite this thread, and review it next year to see where you are then -K?
(Crow's good with hot sauce. Trust me)

I think it will be a fun arcade type shooter, nothing more, but am willing to try "just 'cuz"

Duck wrote:I think it will be a fun arcade type shooter, nothing more, but am willing to try "just 'cuz"

I have no objections to fun arcade shooters. Who would? The problem is, there's been nothing BUT fun arcade shooters since BF2 was released. Quake Wars wasn't as deep as we'd hoped, and beyond that, there's the COD games, Team Fortress 2, the Crysis games . . all fun shooters. No game has had the depth, the organization, the teamwork that BF2 encourages. I'm just REALLY wanting the next step in that direction.

Do we have to wait 10 years before someone else dips their toes in that pool?

I think that the next step in the other direction is http://www.arma2.com/

Duck wrote:HA! Who's the cynic now - HUH?

I'll favorite this thread, and review it next year to see where you are then -K?
(Crow's good with hot sauce. Trust me)

I think it will be a fun arcade type shooter, nothing more, but am willing to try "just 'cuz"

Believe me, the only reason I even bought BF2 was because of Paladin and Doc. I'm fully aware of a need to balance your life, but that game brought me to tears, so gotdamed slow paced, sloppy shitty forever loading, no redirect, frontend that was total crap, expansion packs weeks later while UT was sent out 3 free community packs.... I could go on and on 🙂

You guys prefer hugh player counts 40 or more, I prefer 10-12 with instant respawning. 15-30sec BF respawns just wore me out over the months where I just went back to UT for another year. I still did a 2hr FnF, but that was about it.

If EA is just going to steal elements from COD4 and Crysis warhead, then, only offer 3 tired as hell maps, you know they just want to sell you more maps in a few weeks. Guess buying EA Sims crap for my daughter has strengthened this dislike, but I'm not in the least interested in this at the moment. I'd rather watch TV.

Plus I'm still kinda pissed Warhead had SecuRom from EA, and I really don't trust these sob's.

Videogamer has an interview with lead producer Patrick Liu

Seems as this was not project that was planned in advance but grew out of some of the guys having some free time after finishing their parts on BF Bad Company.

An interesting tease for the future as well...

Patrick Liu wrote:VideoGamer.com: The Battlefield franchise has a rich history and there's lots of interest. Fans are asking when you are going to make certain games. Do you keep an eye on the forums?

PL: Oh yes! 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.

"I can't say anything really, but we have plans. Definitely big plans. The fans don't need to worry."


hmmmmmmmmm where is that one going BF3 or map packs for 1943 or ports for BF2 to 1942/3 world etc etc etc.......

Looked at ArmaII, crude looking.

And looks more like a BFDeux (and what the hell is with all russians wearing blue jogging suits with white stripes (ala CoD4))

I like the fact that BF43 grew out of something else because the people making it liked playing it. That tells me there is a fun element that just kept growing. I can only hope it sells well enough to warrant more maps. Let's face it, the only thing that's killed the BF games in general has been a lack of new maps. It's the fuel that feeds the monster and DICE has never understood that.

Another quote that hints at BF3....

Gordon Van Dyke wrote:Again, we see another hint at the next "hardcore" Battlefield game. Below is quote from the video.

And we really wanted to give people a really focused slice of Battlefield. And give them a complementary game that they can play and keep their Battlefield fix if they are waiting for the next installment of the big full robust Battlefield game where you’re going to get a lot more locations, your going to get more weapons, gadgets, kits and diversity, but this still is going to give you a rock solid experience. We also want to set the bar higher for arcade games. DICE has always been really innovative and trying to push the bounders what we do tech wise and content wise.

Gordon Van Dyke
Battlefield 1943 Producer

From this video interview by Primotech

BF3 will happen someday, just when and where.
The BF franchise has been too good of a cash cow to not have a 3.

Not that this is earth shaking or anything but here is a link to the first movie we saw (sarges post) on 1943, but this is from EA's large download site, it's "high def
and full screen - not youtube quality or second hand video from the convention.

Taks about 5 min to download and you'll need quick time.

http://largedownloads.ea.com/pub/movies/Ba...DwwANNOUNCE.mov

Some updates I found.

TGR: The health system is different than it was before?

EA: There is no health bar. When you get shot, you see your screen darkening a bit. We don't want people focusing on finding health packs and such. We just want you to regenerate and keep playing.

Mini Commander Mode

Take the Air Raid feature, for example. When you climb into a bunker, you're granted the time, and invincibility, to call in a squadron of bombers. Your perspective is then hurtled thousands of feet into the sky, to a point just behind the flying deathbringers. You now have limited control over their movement, and can use a zoom function to time the release of the payload, hopefully so that it lands smack bang on top of a building full of enemy players. Once done, you shift back into the head of your soldier, allowing you to exit the bunker and survey your handiwork in all its destructive glory.

Download is estimated at 350MB. No movies. Sound file size appears to be scaled down. Still for an engine and 3 maps coming from DICE, thats amazing.


Not happy about the lack of a health bar as they are going to make the screen darken. That worries me due to dizziness.

They'll have a version that ships with Dramamine.
CoD4 does it with red and there is no issues other than the screen tints red.

You're really that bad off that your concerned a tint change will make you sick?
If so you are worse off than I can get, although the HL series I still can not play at all.

ArmA 2 is for those of us who want a more in depth Combat Sim. ArmA is a very good game and had destructible environments before others. Arcade style combat is BF/COD/etc. I can only look at BF1943 as a 'FUN' only game. That is cool by me because that is what they advertised it as. Well, I also liked the 36 person server but 24 will do... cause it is all I need to frag Sarge 🔫

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/fullstory.php?id=157405

5 really nice screenshots of wake island. The picture of the hangar is really cool. It shows more buildings in the main town.

sweetness

It is pretty.

Chubby!

Atomm wrote:Chubby!

I am not!!!!

ooo wait crap.

H@H!

A few new updates.

There will be squads in BF43. Sweet!

The number of players in a server has yet to decided for the PC version of the game. Let's hope they make it to 32. That always felt perfect to me for BF42.

Atomm wrote:A few new updates.

There will be squads in BF43. Sweet!

Atomm wrote:The number of players in a server has yet to decided for the PC version of the game. Let's hope they make it to 32. That always felt perfect to me for BF42.

I always liked 40-48 in BF2, but this isn't BF2. Hopefully it will be at least 32, and that will be enough. Too few ppl, and it's like a handful of ppl playing with military vehicles and weapons, not like a battle.

Some new info.

Q&A
Q: Why are we releasing the PC version of Battlefield 1943 in September?

A: The PC is built around the core game and that development process takes a bit longer. We want to ensure a true PC experience and that includes additional features support and gameplay that are not utilized for the console. – Gordon Van Dyke, BF1943 Producer

I actually like this idea. It means the PC game might actually play like a PC game. Let's hope it means they have some time to tweak the server code to allow for more than 24.

Battlefield Bad Company 2, also being released on the new PC-version of the Frostbite, will accommodate 40 players on a server. I'm just guessing, but my bet is that BF1943 will be able to as well.

With squads, any squad member will be able to spawn on any surviving squad member. So the squad leader won't have to hide in the bushies like a sissy while his squadmates have all of the fun storming the flag.

-=NC=-Larva wrote:Battlefield Bad Company 2, also being released on the new PC-version of the Frostbite, will accommodate 40 players on a server. I'm just guessing, but my bet is that BF1943 will be able to as well.

With squads, any squad member will be able to spawn on any surviving squad member. So the squad leader won't have to hide in the bushies like a sissy while his squadmates have all of the fun storming the flag.

I'm of two minds about that. I think it makes the game a little more 'arcadey' - a reduction of strategy. When in BF2, you could see the guy ppl kept popping up next to, and concentrate on him. Also, of course, it forced the squad leader to be careful and not get his ass shot off and his squad to protect him, which is why I was such a shitty squad leader. Close-in combat with an auto-shotgun and a rocket aren't ways to stay alive long - I just tried to take two of them before they popped me 🙂 .

Of course, these problems are offset by the obvious plus of not having one player hiding all the time and playing supply-guy/medic during the slow moments. Additionally, hey, you can spawn on anyone in your squad. I LOVE that! The squadleader can do what he wants, and if he's not particularly good (get out of the jet, doofus!), it's all good. More flexibility in spawning on friends is a plus.

I wonder, can the squadleader spawn on any squad member? He obviously couldn't in BF2, but if anyone else can spawn on any squad member, it doesn't really make much sense to keep the SL from doing it.

DocJon wrote:I'm of two minds about that. I think it makes the game a little more 'arcadey' - a reduction of strategy. When in BF2, you could see the guy ppl kept popping up next to, and concentrate on him.

True. My complaint about BF2 which was taken to the extreme in BF2142 was the gameplay got so complicated that it turned into more work than fun. Remember in earlier versions of BF2 when squads kept rotating the squad leader to keep the squad point alive? That was like playing a video game inside of a game, like Turbo Turkey Puncher in Doom3. In BF2142 you spent more time fighting motion mines, auto-gun turrets and missle silos than actual players. Teamwork is still required even if the gameplay is simplified, because both teams have to play by the same rules: each has to deal with the same advantages and disadvantages.

DocJon wrote:Also, of course, it forced the squad leader to be careful and not get his ass shot off and his squad to protect him, which is why I was such a shitty squad leader. Close-in combat with an auto-shotgun and a rocket aren't ways to stay alive long - I just tried to take two of them before they popped me 🙂 ..

I was the exact same way! I'll happily manage the squad but please don't keep me out of the close quarters goodness! The BF2 squad was a great innovation, one I really liked. Having to run across the map to rejoin teammates in BF1942 sucked. But the spoiler of being a SL was having to be overly cautious when leading the squad. Games are supposed to be fun - it's counter-productive to force certain players to have to sit out or reduce the fun part of a FPS game. Being commander or SL all of the time was a burden.

DocJon wrote:I wonder, can the squadleader spawn on any squad member? He obviously couldn't in BF2, but if anyone else can spawn on any squad member, it doesn't really make much sense to keep the SL from doing it.

I would guess so.