BF1943

[darthscypter]

BF1943 WILL HAVE A DESTRUCTABLE ENVIRONMENT???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!    

[Taranov]

Jumping from engine to engine - not a good idea.
Now modding - very complex process, need lots of devs and lots of time.

[Kubador]

BF1943 WILL HAVE A DESTRUCTABLE ENVIRONMENT???!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!    

Yes, but somehow it doeasn't make a great impression on me as it did couple of years ago. If any engine changes would be made I'd like to see FH in Arma2 engine.

[Sir Apple]

Jumping from engine to engine - not a good idea.
Now modding - very complex process, need lots of devs and lots of time.

Well, yeah. And aside from that BF2 still has many many years left before it dies out.

And by the time that time arrives, god knows what will be out there.  

Refractor 2 = best option, for many years.

[Flyboy1942]

Id rather see FH on its own personalized engine, but that's just dreaming...

[Remdul]

There's no indication Dice/EA will support modding so far, but that's no criteria for us. It depends on whether it has a decent game engine (hopefully better than BF2). We can build the tools ourselves but it the engine doesn't play along there's little we can do about it. Wait and see.

But FH2 won't be the last FH.

[Alakazou]

We'll find out on April 1st...

No, I bet they'll announce the FH2 Zombie mode.

A false release date for FH2.2 will be a cruel nice joke.
I hope Fh2 will not move on other engine.

[Admiral Donutz]

There's no indication Dice/EA will support modding so far, but that's no criteria for us. It depends on whether it has a decent game engine (hopefully better than BF2). We can build the tools ourselves but it the engine doesn't play along there's little we can do about it. Wait and see.

But FH2 won't be the last FH.

Hehe, I'm already looking forward to play FH9 in 15 years from now and laugh at the crappyness compared to the super 1337 engines that will yet see the day of light. *drools*

Edit: Did I say 15 years from now? Make that FH4 then.

[Kubador]

But FH2 won't be the last FH.

Saved... I keep it to your word, dear sir.

[Stevo]

Considering the rather poor support EA gives to non-recent game engines. I think getting away from any of their products would be a good idea.

Also, the introduction to Punkbuster as an anti-cheat measure has hobbled the game in my opinion. I have played Vanilla BF/BF2 and PB'd versions as well. The Non-PB games were smooth as silk.

What I am trying to say is... We tried Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2. The engines got progressively worse as we 'move forward'. Why would EA have a game and reduce the player count if we are moving forward? We are moving backwards. We should be playing on 128-256 player servers at this rate. We get 32 instead?

I think we are letting 'pretty pictures' sway our thinking when we should be looking under the hood of the engine and getting real results.

As for BF2/FH2, the numbers do not lie. Your looking at about 20+ servers running at any one time with 2-3 servers actually having players in them. What was surprising was that there were people here who actually expected FH2 to win MOD of the year. =\

Moving off anything EA releases would be a BIG step forward. Staying with the BF franchise would be a step backwards. FH1 has shown BF42 players what the game SHOULD have been like. Time to move on.

[azreal]

I hope FH2 stays on the engine its on.  We are all very familiar with the BF2 engine. The only thing I think that could force us to change engines is a sharp decrease in player count and/or an engine similar to BF2 and then some.

[Remdul]

I'm more afraid it is the opposite.

[Herc]

Why would EA have a game and reduce the player count if we are moving forward? We are moving backwards. We should be playing on 128-256 player servers at this rate. We get 32 instead?

Most likely because technology hasn't advanced fast enough to Increase quality and quantity of objects in a game. What I am seing is Less quantity and More "quality" eg, double the quality at the expense of halving quantity.. well thats how I'm seeing it these days

[Meadow]

It's 24 players, not 32. Just rubbing some salt in.

[Natty]

what are you guys talking about lol..?

Bf1943 is the next Battlefield game.... why do you say it isnt?... Battlefield Badcompany 2 is the one after that.... both are MODS on the Frostbyte engine - which is the future of Battlefields as we know it.

Frostbyte ofcourse is moddable... dont go crazy thinking "OMG its so new we can never mod it".

Question as Knoffhoff said is, is it worth it?... My opinion is: it isn't, not for us, not now.. for reasons I cant mention here..

Bf1943 will be an awesome game, but Im looking more forward to BFBC2 and the title after that (BF3 perhaps).

24 players, well so what really.. if the game is designed and the maps are optimized for it, then it works ofcourse... you can't go comparing it with BF2 or BF42 and say "omg only 24? that sucks" as it is not BF2 or bf42, it is a new game. From scratch made totally new. Sure heightmap terrains and influences are from older maps - doesnt matter at all. L4D has 4 players or 4vs4 - 8 players.. is it bad? No its awesome - designed and optimized for 4vs4.

I know where it all comes from: people are nostalgic and wants a "new bf42" that can give them (you) what bf42 gave you in 2002, that's not gonna happen. Game companies dont invest millions of dollars to revive players nostalgia, they do it to break new ice, push boundaries further and expand their IPs. Its business.
As long as DICE cant produce a new multiplayer FPS IP, they will use the Battlefield franchise to make all kinds of games, from cartoon free shooters to advanced "nextgen" games. You dont have to like all, but to say "its not battlefield" is just ridiculos, its like saying a QuarterPounder isn't McDonalds, only BigMacs are McDonalds.... nonsense.
Ill be buying all these games, if I will like them as much as I like FH2 or liked bf42 or BFV is too early to say, but Im not pre-judging them based on comparisons with other games... glhf!