As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Battlefield 1943, 1942+1 (First reviews in OP)

The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupinesIrvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
edited September 2009 in Games and Technology
Announcement trailer HD
Soldiers, it's time to do your part in the action packed battles of the World War II Pacific campaign! Pick your path - be it as a rifleman crawling the trenches, a steel fisted tank commander, or ace fighter pilot dog fighting to protect the skies. Play as a lone wolf or with your friends, coordinating to turn the tide of battle, whatever you choose, you get to enjoy the thrill of a fully featured online shooter with the unique Battlefield sandbox experience.

Battlefield 1943 will be available on Xbox LIVE Arcade, PlayStation Network and on PC for download. This give players access to the famous action packed Battlefield gameplay quicker and easier than it's ever been. Play as the US Marines or the Imperial Japanese Navy on match-made servers for optimal challenge, as you gain ranks and awards. Battlefield 1943 is your own version of one of the most famous campaigns in the history of the world!

By Land, Sea & Air!
Unleash wide destruction with Bombing Raids, Tanks, or Fighter Planes launched from Aircraft Carriers and enjoy one of the best experiences in any multiplayer game to-date.

Varied Locations & Up to 24 Players
Play with 24 players online in three beautiful and destructible locations from the Pacific theatre. Whether you choose Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima or the classic Wake Island, you'll experience the best balance of infantry combat complemented by land, sea and air vehicles.

Frostbite-Enabled Destruction
Watch the beautiful Pacific Islands quickly turn into scarred battlefields as destruction rains upon you and your fellow soldiers as you fight to win the battle!

Through the Gun Experience
Use classic and iconic World War II infantry weapons with excellent feel to defeat your foes. Hit 'em hard from afar through your sniper scope or use explosives or melee weapons like bayonets to make it really up close and personal.

Don't forget to check out http://battlefield1943.com/

Updated 7/7/09:
There are a couple of reviews out now.
GamePro = 4.5/5
OXM = 7.5/10
Edge Magazine = 9/10
IGN = 8.5/10

20090709.jpg

Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
The_Spaniard on
«13456731

Posts

  • InzignaInzigna Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    This sounds interesting enough, but I'm personally not a fan of Battlefield, mainly because I have noone to play with because I'm all the way in Asia.

    I would like to play with you guys, but I'm afraid you guys would mock my pathetic ping. Ah, in sooth I know not why I am so sad.

    Inzigna on
    camo_sig2.png
  • PoxPox Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Inzigna wrote: »
    This sounds interesting enough, but I'm personally not a fan of Battlefield, mainly because I have noone to play with because I'm all the way in Asia.

    I would like to play with you guys, but I'm afraid you guys would mock my pathetic ping. Ah, in sooth I know not why I am so sad.

    You live in Singapore! I'm kind of envious of you. Not to mention front row seats to the Singapore Grand Prix at night. :D

    Pox on
    sig.gif
  • InzignaInzigna Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Why are you envious of me? I can't play with any of you guys, and that makes me all sad inside because all I can do is sit and watch.

    Like having front row seats to the Singapore Grand Prix. :(

    Inzigna on
    camo_sig2.png
  • LingxorLingxor Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I was slightly underwhelmed until I saw trees being blown up real good...

    I really hope the 24 play limit is raised though... It's not a battlefield game unless I'm playing a 64 player match on the inevitable 1 good map that the game has to offer.

    Lingxor on
  • Nimble CatNimble Cat Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    This sounds pretty cool. I'll definitely pick it up.

    It's great that they're releasing it over the arcade.

    Nimble Cat on
  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupines Irvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Lingxor wrote: »
    I was slightly underwhelmed until I saw trees being blown up real good...

    I really hope the 24 play limit is raised though... It's not a battlefield game unless I'm playing a 64 player match on the inevitable 1 good map that the game has to offer.

    I'm thinking 24 just for consoles and it will be more for PC because that is a ridiculously low number for a series that we've all come up playing on packed 64 player servers.

    The_Spaniard on
    Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
  • darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Yeah, Live Arcade downloadable? Suddenly a lot more interested.

    Also Bad Company 2 announced, yeeesssssssssssss!

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • davinciedavincie Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Was dissapointed about it being another EA multiplayer game I couldn't play, then I saw it was live arcade, and thus EA will be forced to give us an demo first so I can test it. (That and the system requirements might be low so I can play it on my pc)

    davincie on
    20qx2bp.jpg
  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    this dosent sound or look like a full fledged game. In fact for pc it basically says its for download. Is this a skirmish game based on bf1942 that is more hardcore then heroes?

    DiannaoChong on
    steam_sig.png
  • DroolDrool Science! AustinRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I'm pretty sure I defended and attacked Wake Island about a million times about seven years ago. I love me some Battlfield, but really?

    Drool on
  • mugginnsmugginns Jawsome Fresh CoastRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Yeah I'm not really sure what the draw is for this. It'll likely be $20 and have the same maps you've been playing for years.

    mugginns on
    E26cO.jpg
  • TwistedJesterTwistedJester Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I was so excited by this announcement (I've been dreaming of an updated 1942 forever) until I heard the specifics. First of all, the cap of 24 players is ridiculous as far as PC gaming goes. That's not even half of the cap 1942 had. I have no idea how they're going to have people enjoy a huge map like Wake Island with only 24 players. Second, it seems like there's no naval battles, which was probably the best part of the Pacific theater maps. Third, no server browser? Fourth, only three maps and no Midway?

    It's like they decided to take most of the best parts of 1942 and cut them out.

    TwistedJester on
  • ObsObs __BANNED USERS regular
    edited February 2009
    Man, I just remembered BF1942's naval battles. That was some good shit.

    Obs on
  • FatsFats Corvallis, ORRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Obs wrote: »
    Man, I just remembered BF1942's naval battles. That was some good shit.

    The best shit. Who cares about capturing territory when I can man some 16" guns on a battleship. Oh, and ride on a plane's wings. In a Jeep.

    Basically, they should just re-release BF1942.

    Fats on
  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupines Irvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I was so excited by this announcement (I've been dreaming of an updated 1942 forever) until I heard the specifics. First of all, the cap of 24 players is ridiculous as far as PC gaming goes. That's not even half of the cap 1942 had. I have no idea how they're going to have people enjoy a huge map like Wake Island with only 24 players. Second, it seems like there's no naval battles, which was probably the best part of the Pacific theater maps. Third, no server browser? Fourth, only three maps and no Midway?

    It's like they decided to take most of the best parts of 1942 and cut them out.

    You know, I think you are kinda right. This might just be a stopgap between BF2142 and BF3 to hold people off till that game comes out X number of years down the road.

    The_Spaniard on
    Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
  • DroolDrool Science! AustinRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    As far as Wake being to big for 24 players, my guess is Wake Island will have shrunk quite a bit since we last visited.

    Drool on
  • TwistedJesterTwistedJester Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    That bothers me because I was kind of hoping the next real PC Battlefield game would be a rehaul of 1942. BF2 was great and all but it didn't really capture the epicness of 1942. I would even go so far as to say that 2142 felt more like 1942 than 2.

    TwistedJester on
  • TwistedJesterTwistedJester Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I was also thinking that maybe they shrunk the map, but towards the end of the trailer, when the B-25s are flying in formation over Wake, it looks to be pretty much the same size.

    TwistedJester on
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2009
    I never got why people think a bunch more players = better game, most servers I played on didn't get past 24 anyway. And if they did they were laggy as shit. I wonder if you'll be able to run as a dedicated server on the XBLA/PSN versions?

    However, 1943? Needs planes flying overhead that have lightning attacks.

    FyreWulff on
  • TwistedJesterTwistedJester Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    You must have been playing on some shitty servers then. WOLFGaming 4 lyfe.

    Seriously though, if they're trying to recapture the feel of 1942, they need more players because much of the draw of the game was huge, epic battles.

    TwistedJester on
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2009
    The draw for me was crashing my planes into jeeps on the ground

    FyreWulff on
  • korodullinkorodullin What. SCRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I was so excited by this announcement (I've been dreaming of an updated 1942 forever) until I heard the specifics. First of all, the cap of 24 players is ridiculous as far as PC gaming goes. That's not even half of the cap 1942 had. I have no idea how they're going to have people enjoy a huge map like Wake Island with only 24 players. Second, it seems like there's no naval battles, which was probably the best part of the Pacific theater maps. Third, no server browser? Fourth, only three maps and no Midway?

    It's like they decided to take most of the best parts of 1942 and cut them out.

    You know, I think you are kinda right. This might just be a stopgap between BF2142 and BF3 to hold people off till that game comes out X number of years down the road.

    I could've sworn this is what Battlefield Heroes is for.

    korodullin on
    ZvOMJnu.png
    - The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupines Irvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    korodullin wrote: »
    I was so excited by this announcement (I've been dreaming of an updated 1942 forever) until I heard the specifics. First of all, the cap of 24 players is ridiculous as far as PC gaming goes. That's not even half of the cap 1942 had. I have no idea how they're going to have people enjoy a huge map like Wake Island with only 24 players. Second, it seems like there's no naval battles, which was probably the best part of the Pacific theater maps. Third, no server browser? Fourth, only three maps and no Midway?

    It's like they decided to take most of the best parts of 1942 and cut them out.

    You know, I think you are kinda right. This might just be a stopgap between BF2142 and BF3 to hold people off till that game comes out X number of years down the road.

    I could've sworn this is what Battlefield Heroes is for.

    Who says they can't make more money off one..

    The_Spaniard on
    Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
  • TwistedJesterTwistedJester Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    jdarksun wrote: »
    Fats wrote: »
    Basically, they should just re-release BF1942.
    I'd buy eight.

    TwistedJester on
  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard It's never lupines Irvine, CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    jdarksun wrote: »
    Fats wrote: »
    Basically, they should just re-release BF1942.

    On the frostbite engine, with shiny graphics, destructible environments, and hookers and blackjack. Actually forget the hookers and blackjack.

    The_Spaniard on
    Playstation/Origin/GoG: Span_Wolf Xbox/uPlay/Bnet: SpanWolf Nintendo: Span_Wolf SW-7097-4917-9392 Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/
  • MagicPrimeMagicPrime FiresideWizard Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I've always found the battlefield games a little too big as far as the multiplayer goes. Unless you are on a fully stocked server, its sometimes hard to even find people to fight. Not to mention that when you do manage to get on a full server the lag is a bitch.

    And the hit-boxes on the battlefield games have always been a little iffy.

    MagicPrime on
    BNet • magicprime#1430 | PSN/Steam • MagicPrime | Origin • FireSideWizard
    Critical Failures - Havenhold CampaignAugust St. Cloud (Human Ranger)
  • BrymBrym Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I'm fine with the lower player cap in theory, as long as the maps are balanced to make up for it. Fewer players should mean that you don't have to fight for vehicles as much, and there are fewer random deaths upon spawn due to a lower level of chaos.

    On the other hand, if they don't balance the maps right, they will just feel too empty. Especially the BF1942 maps, they are generally designed to let people fight over multiple capture points at the same time. If 24 player cap means 4 simultaneous 3 on 3 battles, that will be pretty boring. If they manage to keep it focused on 12 on 12 battles, then it will be fun.

    Maybe they need to change the capture system so you can't go after any node at any time.

    Brym on
  • PacifistPacifist Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I will take Bad Company 2 instead.

    Pacifist on
    XBL: Pacifist NJ
  • Pajama_ManPajama_Man Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    jdarksun wrote: »
    Fats wrote: »
    Basically, they should just re-release BF1942.

    On the frostbite engine, with shiny graphics, destructible environments, and hookers and blackjack. Actually just the hookers and blackjack.

    Fixed. :winky:

    I'm kind of disappointed at the prospect of not getting a full blown Battlefiled 2 sequel but eh hopefully the 3 games coming should be more then enough to tie us over until the next big thing.

    Pajama_Man on
    camo_sig.png
  • SteevLSteevL What can I do for you? Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Huh, interesting. BF1942 is the only Battlefield game I've played that I really got into so far, although I have yet to really play Bad Company. It was also one of the first times I really played a game online, so there's some nostalgia there.

    SteevL on
  • PacifistPacifist Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Bad Company is a fantastic online shooter with a very competent singleplayer campaign. I would suggest it for anybody interested in the series.

    Pacifist on
    XBL: Pacifist NJ
  • GrimReaperGrimReaper Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I am horribly disappointed about the 24 player limit, I just hope that is for the consoles.

    The fact that it is being released for the consoles worries me, I suspect it will be aimed more for the consoles because of the sales. So we'll be looking at a simpler version of Battlefield.

    A 64 player game of Battlefield 2 was awesome, I was kind of expecting them to take it to the next logical conclusion of 128 players. The servers are more powerful and there is more bandwidth available, it does make logical sense.

    The one thing I loved about BF2 was that as a sniper you could actually hide some place where you were hard to find. I always loved that, I would find my spot and usually counter-snipe other snipers as it was always the more fun than shooting some poor guy running to somewhere. I think it's the only real multiplayer game where you could do that without standing out like a sore thumb. (Crysis may be similar, but I only played the demo online for a short bit)

    GrimReaper on
    PSN | Steam
    ---
    I've got a spare copy of Portal, if anyone wants it message me.
  • ZzuluZzulu Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Not sure I'd pay money for this

    Zzulu on
    t5qfc9.jpg
  • DiannaoChongDiannaoChong Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    I think you all were delirious. Naval battles in 1942 consisted of:
    A) griefers pushing the boats off the map
    B) griefers raming the boat into the land for everyone to shoot
    C) griefers taking the boat as far away from the island as possible so it was twice as hard to get to the points
    D) griefers *
    E) a good bomber taking out the ship in the first 4 minutes ending the match

    I was about to mention in the before post i hope the ships are ai controlled only, or you come in wave style on a pontoon boat, stationary, or players can tell the boats to go to predetermined points on the map so the griefing cant take over.


    To be honest, for 20$ for wake island and 2 other maps and quick matches in a revamped 1942 sounds freaking awesome. It sounds though like this might be a plan to five and ten dollar us, adding a map for 5$ or features (pilots license comes to mind).

    DiannaoChong on
    steam_sig.png
  • madpeonmadpeon Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Don't forget DICE gave away two free updates for BF:BC, so maybe they will follow suit here and provide some additional content for free...

    Or maybe not knowing EA, but it still looks sexy.

    madpeon on
  • OlivawOlivaw good name, isn't it? the foot of mt fujiRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    So now they're completely out of ideas and they're just remaking 1942 with prettier graphics and even less players per server, and it's sure to have the same poor support and unhelpful patches that the last four games have had

    Yeah count me out

    Olivaw on
    signature-deffo.jpg
    PSN ID : DetectiveOlivaw | TWITTER | STEAM ID | NEVER FORGET
  • eelektrikeelektrik Southern CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited February 2009
    Olivaw wrote: »
    So now they're completely out of ideas and they're just remaking 1942 with prettier graphics and even less players per server, and it's sure to have the same poor support and unhelpful patches that the last four games have had

    Yeah count me out

    Except 1942 was the best game in the series, so a return to that interests me. I'm just glad its not another modern combat game, as I have started to gain a hatred towards modern warfare settings that most people have for WW2.

    As far as the 24 players per server, I imagine thats just for the Console versions. The maps, at least Wake they showed, look large enough to support more and a PC version should support more, even if its billed as a 24 player game, it could be adjustable through mods or server settings, we'll see, but I will remain cautiously optimistic.

    eelektrik on
    (She/Her)
  • BearcatBearcat Registered User regular
    edited February 2009
    If the trailer was using in-game sounds, color me impressed.
    That Zero sounded all sorts of amazing, as well as the Sherman tank.

    Bearcat on
  • StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited February 2009
    I wonder if Heroes is ever going to come out. How many delays now?

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited February 2009
    GrimReaper wrote: »
    I am horribly disappointed about the 24 player limit, I just hope that is for the consoles.

    The fact that it is being released for the consoles worries me, I suspect it will be aimed more for the consoles because of the sales. So we'll be looking at a simpler version of Battlefield.


    Because clearly consoles means simplifying and bringing down the player count, although there are numerous console shooters that support more than 24 players.

    Maybe it's just the harsh reality that listen servers are becoming more popular than dedicated servers has finally hit the PC side of gaming.

    FyreWulff on
Sign In or Register to comment.