Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EA Unveils Two New Battlefield Games

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the now-with-more-battles-and-extra-fields dept.

Games 54

Electronic Arts announced at New York Comic Con that the Battlefield series would be getting two more titles. Battlefield 1943 will be focused on multiplayer, and it's due out for download this summer. It will be available through the PlayStation Network and Xbox Live, and there will be a PC version as well. A website has been launched for the game, and it contains a trailer. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is scheduled for winter, and it will be available for the PC, PS3, and Xbox 360 also. Details for Bad Company 2 are sparse, though one exec said, "... it takes everything that players liked in the original and ups the ante — more vehicles, more destruction and more team play."

cancel ×

54 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Details for Bad Company 2... (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 5 years ago | (#26749963)

"... it takes everything that players liked in the original and ups the ante -- more vehicles, more destruction and more team play."

And a monkey or a pony - whichever you prefer more.

Re:Details for Bad Company 2... (1)

carlvlad (942493) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750189)

I for one don't really care for Bad Company series, but from the article it's written that "BF1943 will be focused on multiplayer". I always thought that Battlefield were always a multiplayer focused game, how more multiplayer can it get? I hope not by having/forcing annoying network clients (like GameSpy and such).

Re:Details for Bad Company 2... (1)

SausageOfDoom (930370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751049)

I didn't think I'd like Bad Company, so didn't pick it up until I saw it on offer at 40% RRP, but I loved it. It's the first game in 20 years that I actually laughed out loud while I was playing - both due to the humour of the comedy script, and the maniacal joy of flattening a town rather than fight house to house. And it went on for ages - compared to a lot of the other games I've payed top price for (CoD WaW, even GoW and Rainbow 6), I thought it was excellent value for money.

Bad Company 2 is definitely a "to buy" for me.

Re:Details for Bad Company 2... (1)

ScienceofSpock (637158) | more than 5 years ago | (#26780343)

I agree, it also felt the most like a "Battlefield" since BF:1942. I didn't like BF:Vietnam, BF2 or BF:2142 at all, but Bad Company brought back that BF:1942 feel that I missed so much. The single player was fun and entertaining, and the multiplayer was everything I missed about 1942.

So what happened to that "for free" one? (1)

will_die (586523) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750085)

So what happened to that battlefield game they were going to release that would be free to play provided you watched the commercials?
Since it is not on the list of 2009 games, and I never heard much of it, was it dropped?

Re:So what happened to that "for free" one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26750125)

You're thinking of Battlefield Heroes, which Wikipedia claims is currently in open beta.

Re:So what happened to that "for free" one? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26750193)

You're thinking of Battlefield Heroes, which Wikipedia claims is currently in open beta.

Oooo.. *signs up for beta* And here I was depressed just about a week ago because they suspended this project..

Re:So what happened to that "for free" one? (1)

crossmr (957846) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751759)

it doesn't appear to be in open beta, the language on the site indicates its still in closed beta and only allowing people in as slots open up.

Re:So what happened to that "for free" one? (1)

xenolion (1371363) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752117)

It is a closed beta, damn shame too, close betas dont find too many bugs. Open betas get more done with finding issues due to the mass mount of people.

Re:So what happened to that "for free" one? (1)

mweather (1089505) | more than 5 years ago | (#26756089)

I can't recall any open beta I've participated in that wasn't preceded by a closed beta.

Re:So what happened to that "for free" one? (1)

crossmr (957846) | more than 5 years ago | (#26768405)

Yes. But an AC above me had stated that wikipedia was claiming it was currently in open beta. That is not true. unless it is hidden and disguised as a closed beta.

Mac OS X release? (1)

SimonTheSoundMan (1012395) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750091)

I thought EA and Apple had a deal of releasing games concurrently for both Windows and Mac?

Re:Mac OS X release? (1)

lag10 (667114) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750279)

It appears that EA have broken the terms of that agreement.

After all, would you honestly expect EA to adhere to their own announcements? They have a spotty track record for that sort of thing.

Oh, Fun... MORE SHIT GAMES (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26750099)

I wish people would stop buying games with the EA logo on them. The majority of the Battlefield games that I have played all look and feel the same, but with just a face lift and some lie about how they totally developed the game from scratch.

I'm under the impression that when you say you developed the game from scratch, you don't leave in bugs in the older version of the engine that you're using that have been fixed in the other Battlefield games.

These games are barely any fun. If your team is getting raped, there's no mercy clause to end it fast. They just make sure to drag it out as long as possible. Yeah, that's a lot of fun. Good job at not ever fixing that in any of your shitty games there, Dice. Hey, EA, as a publisher, you've continued to ride the fail boat in making them fix these sort of glaring gameplay issues.

Anyone who buys these games are slaves to mediocrity and shit games.

Oh, Fun... MORE PLASTIC INSERTS. (1)

Ostracus (1354233) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750353)

"I wish people would stop buying games with the EA logo on them. The majority of the Battlefield games that I have played all look and feel the same, but with just a face lift and some lie about how they totally developed the game from scratch."

We "buy" movie stars after a face lift. Why not games?

Re:Oh, Fun... MORE SHIT GAMES (1)

Dutchy Wutchy (547108) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750619)

BF: Vietnam, BF2, and BF2142 (did I miss any) failed to draw my interest. I did not like that Vietnam and BF2 were rip-offs of popular mods (not certain if 2142 was, as well). BF1942 and the expansion Road to Rome were very enjoyable, especially with friends. Bad Company offered an entertaining single player.

Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (4, Insightful)

Aceticon (140883) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750197)

I've been playing the Battlefield series of games in the PC since the original Battlefield 1942 (from 2002) and the progression from the earlier games to the later games has been:
- The more recent games have been released with more bugs than the earlier games
- Even though they started with more bugs, the more recent games have received fewer patches, fixing fewer bugs and often the patches added more bugs than they fixed

Certainly, for the later games on the series, EA seems to have moved most of the development team to new projects almost as soon as the game was out even though what was out in the shops and selling was pretty much Beta quality software.

This is especially insulting because this was happening at a time when the rest of the Software Industry was improving their track record of releasing adequately tested and finished software.

If you're planning on buying one of these for the PC, my recommendation is that you sit on the sidelines for one or two months, keeping an eye on the forums for report of problems with the games and checking if EA actually fixes the reported bugs.

Re:Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26750359)

If you're planning on buying one of these for the PC, my recommendation is: don't.

Don't support EA's treatment of both their consumers and their own employees.

Re:Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (1)

wild_quinine (998562) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750389)

- The more recent games have been released with more bugs than the earlier games - Even though they started with more bugs, the more recent games have received fewer patches, fixing fewer bugs and often the patches added more bugs than they fixed

Battlefield 2142 was the worst offender, and the strongest indication that EA loves money and hates customers.

This was a game released hot on the heels of a broken Battlefield 2. Instead of attempting to resolve the issues with Battlefield 2, they shipped a brand new game, using the same engine, with all of the same issues.

ObCarAnalogy: That's like if Ford made a car with faulty brakes, but instead of issuing a recall, they made another car... with faulty brakes. And then sold it to the people that had written off their cars due to some mysterious and untraceable brake issue.

Put like that, it's not just Ford that are at fault. Stop buying the damn cars, idiots!

Nothing new here (1)

Fordeka (1470901) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750911)

EA has always released rushed games with minimal support after release. The Crysis series is another good recent example of this.

Re:Nothing new here (1)

Cornelius the Great (555189) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752157)

EA didn't develop Crysis. They only published it.

Re:Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (1)

Siriaan (615378) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751549)

Your memory is scrambled. Battlefield 1942 was ludicrously buggy - there was a patch released two days before the game even came out and it then took several patches for it to really get up to speed. There are still many bugs and exploits in the game that will never be patched.

Re:Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26754783)

The game is actually final code long before you get it in your hands. There has to be time to create the boxes, the discs, get certain companies to certify the game for their systems (in the case of PS3 and XBOX) and finally launch. The fact there was bugs found in a game that offers so much freedom to the players is not surprising at all, and the fact there was a patch released before the game actually got to customers hands doesn't say EA hates customers, it just says that more bugs were found and they fixed them instead of claiming there are no bugs.

Re:Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (1)

dontPanik (1296779) | more than 5 years ago | (#26755031)

So much hate for Battlefield!

I hate big greedy corporations as much as the next slashdotter, but I've been an avid player of both Battlefield 2 and 2142, and can say that while, yes, there are bugs, they were rarely bad to the point where the game experience is ruined.

And even if an exploit is found due to bugs, the player community is good about policing themselves so that players who are using the exploits are kicked/banned from servers. Also, Battlefield 2 recieved a lot of patches over its lifespan. I would like to look at my xfire patch history to support this, but I'm afraid its on my other computer. BF2 could have used a few more patches, but I feel that EA did its responsibility to help its user community until 2142 came out.

If you decide to wait this one out and not buy until a few patches come out, I support your decision. It probably will be buggy when it first comes out. But rest assumed this Battlefield aficianado will be on the front lines!

Re:Bugs and almost zero post release bugfixing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26759705)

This is exactly the reason I avoid EA games entirely. BF2 was awesome, but they left it to rot with plenty of bugs. The result? I'm not going to buy into the Battlefield series anymore. They had a good thing going, but leaving a bugged-up product out there is not going to make me go back for more.

Battlefield 2 (1)

Canazza (1428553) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750569)

I played BF2 for quite a while, enjoyed it immensly with my flatmates, however, we also got pretty much the same kick out of the Desert Combat mod for BF1942. Same setting, same vehicles (minus the turbo charged buggy) better graphics
I didn't buy battlefield 2142 as the only thing that appeared to be different was the gimicky 'board the space ship and destroy it' mechanic. Now it appears with BF1943 they're going back in time, therefore there will be no spaceships and even that gimmick has gone.
Churning out the same game with a new graphics engine seems to be the trend nowadays with EA. shame really.

Re:Battlefield 2 (1)

xenolion (1371363) | more than 5 years ago | (#26750665)

Churning out the same game with a new graphics engine seems to be the trend nowadays with EA. shame really. The biggest offender of the should be any Madden game.. I for one bought 2142 and liked it but the lack of updates/patches and new addons with out paying for them sucks. Also they have yet to release the sdk packs for 2142 yes you can use the bf2 ones if you mess around and tweak it but thats too much of a pain. (if im wrong about this point me into the direction for it) But if EA would release the sdk pack and let the modders fix and tweak the game to run correctly for people.

Nowadays? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#26760929)

Where have you been during their EA-Sports series "N?L " + $year?

So really... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26750899)

"Play with 24 players online in three beautiful and destructible locations...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."

So really, they've taken the original BF1942, spruced up the graphics, made trees that fall over, reduced the player numbers and removed all but three of the levels. And they want people to pay more money for this and endure more or EA's dicking about with bugs, poor updates and maybe DRM?

Heh. No thanks.

Re:So really... (1)

buffer-overflowed (588867) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752181)

"Play with 24 players online in three beautiful and destructible locations...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."

So really, they've taken the original BF1942, spruced up the graphics, made trees that fall over, reduced the player numbers and removed all but three of the levels. And they want people to pay more money for this and endure more or EA's dicking about with bugs, poor updates and maybe DRM?

Heh. No thanks.

Yea, it's pretty audacious.

Re:So really... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26758859)

SOLD! Sounds wonderful to me.

Re:So really... (1)

cowscows (103644) | more than 5 years ago | (#26759137)

As someone who really enjoyed BF1942, and still occasionally plays it these days, I think this is awesome news.

Take one of my favorite games, bring the graphics up to speed, add a couple extra bells and whistles, and charge a non-ridiculous price for it? Hell yeah I'm game.

Finally some multiplayer! (1)

Cathoderoytube (1088737) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751063)

"Battlefield 1943 will be focused on multiplayer"

That'll be a welcome change. Battlefield 1942 was way too focused on who got to fly the plane, shooting down whoever go the plane before you, trying to park a jeep on the plane to see if it could take off with it, trying to do a bridge loop in the Market Garden level with the plane, winding up as a tail gunner in a plane and shooting the tail out for sheer spite, and trying to stand on the plane while it was flying.

Rehashed 1942? (1)

TheRealJobe (1125771) | more than 5 years ago | (#26751393)

I loved 1942,couldnt get enough of it. Then Vietnam came out.... played it for about 3 hours total... Never touched either since... But from what I do remember of 1942 some of the clips from 1943 looks like they are rehashing the same damn maps... Did I miss something? Is 1943 just a remake?

Re:Rehashed 1942? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26751491)

No, no, they are just rehashing the same maps. Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal and Wake Island, all 3 were in the original.

Re:Rehashed 1942? (1)

Krater76 (810350) | more than 5 years ago | (#26788851)

Did I miss something? Is 1943 just a remake?

We can only hope!

To be honest though, the South Pacific maps are not historically inaccurate. Wake Island, Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, etc. all are somewhat accurate for shape so any map they did of those would be very similar. I believe the video was gameplay from Wake Island.

If this was going to be a remake I'd prefer it include the European and Africa maps. There were more gems in there - Kursk, Battle of the Bulge, Market Garden, Stalingrad, Battleaxe - just to name a few. The variety was better too, the Pacific maps are all islands and palm trees.

Welcome to the year 2000 (1)

EdZ (755139) | more than 5 years ago | (#26752811)

Maybe they'll finally support non 4:3 resolutions.

Re:Welcome to the year 2000 (1)

saxoholic (992773) | more than 5 years ago | (#26759407)

Actually, the most recent Battlefield 2142 patch does support widescreen natively.

I know the plot of BF1943 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26753675)

You have to use proper squad-based tactics to infiltrate a Nazi castle where a top-secret patch to fix the infamous BF2 enemy player color bug is located.

When you finally succeed, you find the patch does not actually fix anything, but you get a new map called The Battle of Karkland's rest stop which features the new Janitor Class.

Decent co-op mode? (1)

ninjagin (631183) | more than 5 years ago | (#26754125)

Okay, so maybe it's not that easy to do, but my friends and I like to play with the bots. Good Co-op would make this easier to sell to my group. COD really missed the ball on this, and even though the coop on Battlefield vietnam and 2142 and 1942 wasn't that great, it still made for decent gameplay. Oh, and MORE MAPS, please!

Re:Decent co-op mode? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26756063)

AIX (Allied Intent) v2.0 does a very good job with coop mode (or singleplayer for that matter) and is a completely FREE mod for BF2.
Worth a try and plenty of free new maps available in mappacks.

BF42 Revisited (1)

Atomm (945911) | more than 5 years ago | (#26754333)

I played BF42 for years. When BFV came out, I played it up until BF2 came out. I played BF2 for a while, then walked away.

Guess where I went? BF42. Even though the graphics are outdated and the maps lack any kind of resemblance of terrain, it's been the most fun of any of the games.

The WWII mod for BFV was a huge improvement over BF42. The same game, but better. The only downside was the 3 maps. If BF43 is the same game, but with a better engine, I would pay for it. I just wish they would stop dicking around and put out a full blown version.

For the record, I hate EA. I hate the lack of patch support. I hate DRM. But BF42 was such a phenomenal game, I am willing to look past that even for 3 maps. Past that, I've avoided everything to date.

Battlefield Heroes is Free (1)

sponga (739683) | more than 5 years ago | (#26754871)

I cannot believe this hasn't gotten coverage here and especially since it is a 'FREE GAME' provided by EA.

That is right, EA is testing a new market and they are introducing a free Battlefield game. They will make their money off the game by buying stuff in-game like addons to your character, but you cannot buy gameplay advantages like bigger/powerful weapons.

Not only is it free, but the hardware requirements are very low to the tone of even minimum XP requirements and this game will be a boom on small laptops.

This is very revolutionary in the PC gaming industry, hopefully other developers will take notice and try to follow this model. 'Free as in Beer? No. Free as in EA? Yes'

I have been a Battlefield follower since it came out as Operation Eagle was the original title, In fact if you look at Operation Eagle and compare it to Battlefield Heroes you will see a lot of similarities and stuff that should have been added a long time ago.

EA and the Battlefield team have a notorious history of missing items in-game, empty spaces on the menu where there should have been an item. Overall though the game has been great and you cannot beat the mid air dogfights that take place in BF1942.

Re:Battlefield Heroes is Free (1)

sponga (739683) | more than 5 years ago | (#26755263)

duhhh I should have provided a link to the Free Beta that is about to start, so signup early.

battlefield-heroes.com

Also you can follow their development on Twitter
twitter.com/bfheroes

Interesting how they use post it notes on some of their pictures to organize the project, I hear that is the best way to organize things like that with stickies on a big board.

Re:Battlefield Heroes is Free (1)

Krater76 (810350) | more than 5 years ago | (#26788955)

I don't want to downplay how great it is what EA is doing but BF:Heroes might be way to cartoony for many, and a lot of BF diehards are worried about how arcade the game appears to play.

I'm interested in trying it but I'm wary after seeing a video with players on the wings of planes, wearing kilts and weird hats. It's also not an FPS but is more of a third-person shooter.

Bad Company's Achilles Heel... (1)

Greg_D (138979) | more than 5 years ago | (#26755061)

... was that you couldn't talk to everyone on your team to get them all on the same page. When you only have voice chat with 3 other guys, it's hard to coordinate your efforts if two of your squad members decide to go off and do their own thing. The game pretty much requires a high level of teamwork in order to be successful on offense, because there's no deathmatch or slayer game type.

BFV Active Community (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26755285)

bah, who needs a new BF game?
There is a splendid active BFV community here http://www.ara-deathfromabove.com/joomla/ that offers mods, maps and 24/7 online action.

If you haven't tried BFV in awhile, check out these guys mods/ maps and servers.

Let's list what we know (1)

MWoody (222806) | more than 5 years ago | (#26756215)

What we know about BF1943:

  - Released for PC, PSN, and Live
  - Supposed to cost about $15
  - Only three classes (like Heroes), all of them designed to fight (no support classes)
  - Auto-healing over time
  - Unlimited ammo
  - Only three maps
  - 24 players (down from 64 in its PC predecessors)

In other words, in every single way - save possibly being able to knock down trees - inferior to previous entries in the series. Fuck you, EA. Fuck you.

What else will it have more of? (1)

Kelmar (468410) | more than 5 years ago | (#26758361)

"... it takes everything that players liked in the original and ups the ante â" more vehicles, more destruction and more team play."

More consumer restrictions with even stricter DRM!

Re: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26758379)

cry more n00bs

All nice. But how some working anticheat tools? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#26760983)

Let's be blunt here. I've rarely seen a FPS game in recent history that is so cheater ridden as the whole Battlefield series. I especially loathe what happened to BF2142, which was definitly my personal favorite. But it's simply unplayable. Invariably, you'll have someone who cheats and you can't do jack about it. Since it's simple abuse of game mechanics and bugs and no external cheat tool, no anticheat catches it.

Unless there's a reason to believe that the game is playable, especially with such a strong focus on multiplayer, I won't buy.

Re:All nice. But how some working anticheat tools? (1)

MRe_nl (306212) | more than 5 years ago | (#26764705)

Have you tried Punkbuster?
Not for bleeding edge competative FPS, but works well on "casual" Enemy territory/Quake.
http://www.evenbalance.com/ [evenbalance.com]

Re:All nice. But how some working anticheat tools? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 5 years ago | (#26767235)

As I said, it's not cheating by aimbot or similar external tools that could be detected by PB. Cheaters in BF abuse game internal bugs like the ability to "fall" into buildings where they can shoot out but nobody can shoot in. Other cheats included drop capsule "surfing" that enabled the cheater to fly across the map during orbital drop (has allegedly been fixed but I think I've seen something like that recently) and some other map glitching that allowed players to hide inside unaccesable spaces "behind" the map where they can't be shot (but can shoot out from). It's nothing PB could detect because it's all inside the game, no external program running, nothing that manipulates the game input.

EA taking it to the next step... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26762383)

No really they have, i remember when bf1942 came out, it was great, 64 people playing at once was great, but bf1943 is just taking the piss out of its customers now, just disgusting.

I cant begin to imagine how hard it would have been to come up with this game concept. I honestly did not think EA could get worse after the BF2 series, however i stand corrected.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>