Who's getting Battlefield 1943?

This game is gonna be awesome. With a price of $15 who wouldn't want to try this game. Although there are only 4 maps, it is always possible for DICe to release future maps. For everyone who has played Battlefield heroes, this game will be the realistic version of BFH. The most awesome part is the fact that the enviroments are destructible . I can't wait to get this game in september to try it on my MSI 1651 ID2 which ill get in the next couple of weeks. So who else is gonna get it, and what are your thoughts on the game?

Here are some of the pictures of the gmae found on gamepot:

 

I'm playing it on the 360 alot, and it's brilliant, don't know if i will get it for pc, depends if there is anything different.

 

The only thing that I think might be different is that you might be able to have a larger number of players per game. like maybe 32 or possibly higher?

 

Yea same here I want 64, plus i dunno if I will like the 3 class set up. Also, I wonder how optimized it is going to be for pc... This game seems to be more of a console type game rather than pc.

 

Actually I think it was made for the pc. The reason I say this is that DICE only made Battlefield heroes for PC. With this said they probably used the same team who made this game to make 1943. Also some ps3 and 360 players have said that the controls for airplane felt awkward, so they probably quickly rushed the console ports, while they spend another month touching up their main project. Why would they spend another month on development on the pc than the consoles if the pc was not the main platform?

 

It looks exactly like BF2 with better graphics...

 

not only better graphics, but also DESTRUCTIBLE ENVIRONMENTS!!! . Thats is the coolest part. So buildings can be blown apart, and by the end of a battle it really looks like a warzone.

 

Yeap, been playing it on PS3 too a little, it's okay for a small (~500mb) game but not really worth 14.99$.

 

Played the trial on 360, didnt like it much

 

Well I'm sure they'll make more maps. So what do you guys not like about it? Have you played any other battlefield games?

 

where do i recognize that map from?

 

Really liked the first ones, BF1942 and BF2.

What will be required to run the game at maximum settings when it comes out on the PC?

 

Well, the desktop prespective a 9800 GT should be enough.

On the Laptop side, I'm pretty sure a single 4850/260M/280M should be good enough.

 

Panzer you think a 160M should be able to handle max on this game?

 

I sure hope there's more than 4 maps. This just won't do the game justice. If they do periodic expansions with more maps and more classes, then I'm all for that. But Battlefield series is all about PC IMHO. BF1942, BF2, BF2142 put them on the charts.

This will be a good stop-gap until Battlefield 3.

 

Maybe, but I think more on lines medium/high settings rather max.But we still dont know how good this is optimised for PC yet so I would and see.

 

I'm getting it. I miss playing BF2 till BF3 comes out.

 

After playing BF:Bad company, I can't play games anymore unless they have destructible environments! The HDR sound, destructible terrain and general cinematic feel of battle completely blew me away. Is this new BF like that?

 

It looks really good but I think since it was made for multiplayer, you will be able to play the game in very good settings even with a decent specs (like 9600M GT or 9600M GS, core2duo 1.8GHz). I can't wait to try it with that price tag, at least until MW2 comes out.

 

its pretty bad. i played it on ps3 for awhile its pretty much a stripped down version of bf2. the graphics are not that good at all. bf2 wake island is so much better then 1943 wake island.

 

Can you be specific about stripped down? Hey can any of you guys describe how destructible the environment is? Like can bullets cause destruction or is just bombs/tanks/rpg?

 

like all the airplanes, boats, and helicopters and all the good stuff with bf2 is gone! i was quite disappointed. there are only 3 or 4 classes which are dumbed down. you cant do half the stuff you could do in bf2 which made it fun. a good example is you cant get back on the us carrier because they blocked of where the boats were on the carrier

 

Well the reason there are no jets or helicopter is because this is a world war 2 game lol.

 

No Battlefield 1943. I would rather add few more bucks and get COD MW2.

 

i know but honestly its not fun if you played bf2. it just seems a cheap attempt to make money

 

Actually MW2 will be the first pc game to cost $60 so it is 4 times the price than BF 1943 .

 

Judging by the stellar reviews and hopefully <$20 price tag I will definitely be getting it. Especially since I'm happy that BF3 has been confirmed because prior to that I was cursing EA and DICE for catering to consoles only.

 

ill get it for PC.

 

Huh?

There are both planes and boats in BF1943.

The fact it's a stripped down BF game is why it's so much fun, they cut out a ton of the pointless complexity that never really added much to the game in favour of streamlining everything to focus on shooting people in the face.

It's the closest in spirit to BF1942 by far.

 

not like the planes or boats in bf2

 

Well yeah, WW2 planes and boats were slightly different to modern ones.

 

Few more bucks is few more 20$ bills.

 

only about 50ish years different
ill be getting it, looks fun!

 

no i know that but like the carrier copters helped so much and u cant get back onto the us ships???? come on wake island is ruined!!!

 

Well if you can't get on ships it makes the battle more focused on going into battle instead of just staying on a boat randomly bombarding the island. That is why they took it out most likely it would be extremely annoying especially with destructible environments lol.

 

It was fun being able to sneak onto a ship and steal planes or just cause a distraction in '42. Controlling the ships were kinda fun too.

 

yeah u cant do that in 1943

 

Well this game is nice game to play whenever you need a break from modern warfare 2 comes out .

 

How can you get a break from a game that ain't out yet, and one you don't know if will he good?




My thoughts on 1943: This is defintely not the Battlefield Heroes team that made this game(which is a much more uniqe game than this).

I thought 1943 seemed very poor. There is a difference between making something less simple for the sake of better a better game, and just dumping it down(24 players, removing medics etc...).

The spirit of the awesome original that came out in 2002 is completely good and thanks to the Frostbite destructible enviorments like in Bad Company, the game feels loose and buggy. Sounds and animations are poor. The act of firing and shooting is not fun at all, and you can see how they stripped the epic mayham from the game.

 

Well I already now infinity ward will deliver with modern warfare 2. This game is not meant to be a full retail game. Think of it more of an arcade game. Of course it will be stripped down it's only 15 bucks.

 

This game looks kind of meh. It's just that there doesn't seem to be much to it, and with other games coming out that'll don't cost that much more that offer a complete experience, this just doesn't seem worth it. Plus if it's anything like BFBC's destructible enviornments, you'll only be able to cheaply blow up things in pre defined spots. That game had no real physics to it, and I personally thought it was terrible.

MW2 shouldn't even be questioned. It WILL be amazing, and it will be the best game to come out this year. Activision/infinity ward have never made a bad CoD game, ever, and this one won't be anything short of amazing. Granted we probably won't have any real physics, or destruction in mw2 either, but it'll come with the full experience.

 

The full experience of triple frag martyrdom, noob tubes, and maps the size of a paddling pool, no doubt.

 

I can't stand how small the maps are in Call of Duty now.Consoles have completely ruined the game.I would rather play Counter Strike:Source

 

All you gotta to find is a nice server that doesnt allow any of those nooby things stoned penguin. . regarding the maps is the fact that small maps require more skill because you can't hide. plus it makes matching more of a challenge because it relies more on your ability to shoot rather than your ability to hide or sneak around. Thats just in my opinion though. But i agree the maps are small.

 

Smaller maps have no relation to skill whatsoever.

 

hhaahha i miss taking a copter with my friend on wake island and jumping out of it and landing on the carrier and snipping people...ahahahh

 

Did you ever see that tiny map with truck containers?That required no skill whatso I ever, I could shoot any where I wanted to and have gotten a kill.Talk about spamming grenades, not mention there is always an enemy behind you, so it was basicly a choo choo train of death.Not fun at all.

 

Well not all maps were that small and that map was purposely small. with size's relation to skill I was referring to the idea is that the bigger that map the easier it is to hide and camp. When a map is smaller you must confront the enemy more often and this exponential increase of occurrence with the enemy makes skill the more determinant variable in success or survival, excluding the use of grenades. Another process that relates to this idea is the idea of a stream. There are two streams with an equal rate of water flow. One is wide, and one is narrower. The narrower the stream the stronger the force of contact of water (occurrence of meeting the enemy) increases. The only thing that determines success of a rock remaining stable (surviving a shoot out), or being blasted away by water force(dieing in a gun fight) is the shape or weight of rock (amount of skill). In the wider river the water flow is reduced in every part of the river(the chance of occurrence with the enemy) due to this the rock can have wider variety of sizes and shapes (levels of skill and still survive) and this is due to this decrease of the occurrence with the water pressure.

 

for what its worth, i prefer battlefield heroes.

if you are going to cut out the fat and streamline the game, don't do it half-assed, go all out. i think battlefield heroes achieves more of that than this game does.

my opinion.

 

You seem to make the common mistake of assuming that anyone not sprinting around at 200mph spamming like ammo is going out of fashion is unskilled in some way.

Try telling real soldiers that maintaining position and moving tactically requires no skill and they'll have a much different opinion on the subject.