[Multiplatform] Battlefield 1943, a.k.a. Maybe it actually works now, awesome.

Both the patches and any new version would be required to go through that nebulous magical whatever-the-fuck that is the Microsoft certification process. If they could bypass that though, super. Bethesda's skipped it with the fixes for Fallout DLC, but that involved them actively admitting a problem instead of...well, this.

Half the problems this thing experiences are on their end, dealing with their servers, such as the squad splitting fuck ups and the other various connection issues. Freezing, error handling, and visual problems aside, there's not much (outside of the gameplay balancing issues Devo wants) that could be fixed with an all new product belched out right away.

I'm willing to try again in about 4 to 8 weeks, see if anything's been touched up, but that's about it. Here's hoping, since the core product is wonderful when it isn't choking to death on it's own vomit.

Finally, would you slap me if I kissed you?

Their server issues did most of us in I think. It's one thing for a game to have it's gameplay issues, it's entirely different for the game to basically tell you to fuck yourself when you try to play with pals.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Colonel Skills

Half the problems this thing experiences are on their end, dealing with their servers, such as the squad splitting fuck ups and the other various connection issues.

Which is again the reason they'd need something new and not just something patched.

Without getting too nerdy on me - does anyone know if the server issues are in the way the game talks to the servers via bad programming or the servers themselves or what? At this point, Superman Returns has fewer bugs and more fun in it.

Ciao.

Bad programming would be my guess, especially given the whole if you drop some packets, the entire 360 locks up.

Cheers.

Drop it like its hot.

Ciao.

In the simplest terms, most of the issues (both those already fixed and still remaining) fall into the latter category, while comparitively few of them fall into the former.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by LeHah

Drop it like its hot.

Pray to god you don't drop that shit.

Ciao.

If the errors were in the way the game talked to the servers, it would be a lot more clearcut, because pretty much everyone would be getting affected. Since it's the servers acting screwy, some people luck out and then the actual GAME is fine, and then others can't get past the wall of bugs in the servers.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by YOU MAD

Pray to god you don't drop that shit.

DO I NEED TO TELL YOU WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH ALUMINUM TUBES

YELLOW CAKE

Ciao.

Originally Posted by LeHah

DO I NEED TO TELL YOU WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH ALUMINUM TUBES

YELLOW CAKE

Battlefield 1943's Head Dev right here:



"Its alright I got this here CIA napkin."

For Battlefield 1943 Players (they're the only ones who will get this):

Cheers.

I actually bought this yesterday on the insistence of Phong and Harvey and had a real blast playing it for a few hours. There are a few graphical glitches here and there and whilst the squad splitting can be annoying, it's easily remedied by everyone except the party leader quitting then getting re-invited. Takes about 20 seconds to fix, if that.

The game itself is pretty fun, although I imagine less so without a squad full of mates. That there's only three jobs makes for some balance issues and they really need to make the tanks suffer more damage from rockets although perhaps I'm just too used to Frontlines where any tank can be killed with three rockets and they're homing rockets. I'd prefer a layout of the maps that lead to a more definite attack and defence direction, all too often you capture a flag only to be shot in the back by people capturing the one behind you but again, that could just be too much Frontlines.

It's certainly worth a tenner though if you have some mates to play it with.

Ciao.

Tanks can be two shotted if you hit them in the ass. Armour is weaker back there. There's less distinct vehicle damage zones than in BF2, but the concept is the same.

I have found that, sometimes (most of the time), when you try to rejoin your squad after getting split, the damn thing rejects your connection attempts. At least, that's how it was before this last weekend. Perhaps that three hours of downtime actually resulted in some work being done.

Cheers.

The game may well be less annoying than it was, but it's still plenty frustrating, mostly now because of the sheer number of idiots populating the battlefield. I'd be very surprised if many people beyond the GFFer (and associates) filled squad were doing anything sensible, and the number of people I found just randomly camping useless locations. That coupled with issues where the game ignores damage sometimes, vehicles are random as shit (lol @ Devo's jeep image), and various other inconsistencies.

The game can be fun, but it's fun tinged with a lot of frustration and annoyance, and the rather irritation-free fun I've been having in Burnout Paradise reminds me that I don't need to put up with that kind of bullshit annoyance in games when I have so many better options available. Hell, I'd rather risk reload glitches in Call of Duty 4, as ultimately that's still a far better game in my book.

Ciao.

Originally Posted by OmagnusPrime

The game may well be less annoying than it was, but it's still plenty frustrating, mostly now because of the sheer number of idiots populating the battlefield. I'd be very surprised if many people beyond the GFFer (and associates) filled squad were doing anything sensible, and the number of people I found just randomly camping useless locations. That coupled with issues where the game ignores damage sometimes, vehicles are random as shit (lol @ Devo's jeep image), and various other inconsistencies.

The game can be fun, but it's fun tinged with a lot of frustration and annoyance, and the rather irritation-free fun I've been having in Burnout Paradise reminds me that I don't need to put up with that kind of bullshit annoyance in games when I have so many better options available. Hell, I'd rather risk reload glitches in Call of Duty 4, as ultimately that's still a far better game in my book.

Ha ha, what? Burnout is your idea of frustration free online gaming? You mean you enjoy joining a game, suggesting someone actually starts a race, getting ignored while the host attempts all kinds of 8 man challenges, failing all of them because there's one person in the room just driving around in circles and ending up with everyone just driving up and down the bridge jumping into each other endlessly?

If you want to play team games with more than 4 a side with any sort of tactical sensibilty across the team then you need to start forming bigger parties or prepare yourself for a lifetime of dissapointment mate. There will always be idiots who are playing just to get their kill averages up or to get achievements or to fly the planes because everyone else is a jew nigger fag bitch noob and until they get rid of leaderboards and achievements or make the leaderboards based on highest number of base captures, that's here to stay in games like this. I think it's Frontlines where you get a single point for a kill and ten for a base capture and that encourages people to play it properly, capturing bases rather than dicking about as a sniper in a stupid spot but even then you get queues for the helicopters and people taking them without waiting for a co-pilot.

That doesn't mean you can't have fun though. A group of four or so should be enough to mount a reasonable assault on any flag, especially as you can spawn on your squadmates so can keep up the pressure and there will be the same number of idiots on the other team as on your own so the numbers are still balanced.

Different people get different things out of gaming. Some people like to be the highest scorer every time, some people like to be on the winning team, some like to scream insults down the mic at strangers and some just like to dick about with their mates. I'd never be so bold as to tell you what to play but I imagine you'd get a lot less frustrated with team games if instead of always playing the newest games (Which will attract a vast number of casual gamers just pissing about), you played something a bit older, meaning the try-it-for-a-bit-then-buy-something-shinier brigade will have moved on and the only people still playing will be those who really like the game and probably have a deeper understanding of the sensible tactics and what have you.

In my experience, you get much better matches in unpopular games, assuming you're the type to take your gaming seriously rather than just playing for a laugh.

Cheers.

99% of the people I've encountered in Burnout online these days are interested in actually doing challenges, actually doing events or something else. It's not been difficult to get a good group of people together at all, and I'd be happy to host a session of races with you and other GFFers online sometimes.

Anyways, that's for another thread. I know you get dumb people in all sorts of games, I'm not arguing that point, but it's the number of idiots I encountered in BF1943 PLUS the various gameplay issues on the game's side that make it frustrating. When there's no perceivable lag why the hell should a clip of bullets to the back of someone's head, that the game tells me are hitting, not work? And then one shot at distance on the same dude later results in a kill?

But yes, the number of idiots I've run into is crazy. So many games I'd find it was just me and Devo (and bear in mind this was before all you guys decided to buy the game, so it was literally me and Devo, sometimes Ultima if the game would let him join us) would be the only people doing anything on our team. And with just two people it's hard work, and depressing when the second we'd stop defend a flag and go to take another the one we'd just left would start flashing as it was being claimed by the enemies. I did bloody well in BF1943, and at times it was a lot of fun, but the fun/frustration ratio was too heavily tilted in the annoyance camp for me to continue wasting time with it.

Ciao.

Played more of this last night and I'm enjoying it more and more. It's slightly annoying that people hang around waiting for planes and leave the carrier in boats on their own but that also works in your favour. On Iwo Jima especially, rather than rushing straight for the shore, you're better off getting two gunners and driving a boat around the far side of the island. You can then pick off people in boats on their own very easily, kill any idiots waiting for a plane on the deck or using the flak guns then capture the nearest objective on the shore (The beach on the Jap side, can't remember the name on the other side) from behind the enemy. Leave a couple of people there to guard it (And if they're snipers keep picking off people on the carrier) then roll up all the bases from behind. You can then rely on people being idiots and coming ashore alone and keep picking them off as they come. I ended up in a squad with a couple of random guys for a couple of matches last night and we wreaked havoc like that with just the three of us. People's almost obsessive need to get loads of kills rather than ever defending bases means you can predict what they're going to do a lot of the time and attacking a base from behind is successful 90% of the time.

I also spent a while on the horseshoe shaped island, camping out with a sniper rifle halfway down the cliff in the middle of the island. You can see four of the bases from there and can't be seen from the nearest road. You can pick people off from range and when you see a tank coming, sneak back up the hill, wait for it to pass and then fuck it up with dynamite.

The more I play this, the more I'm enjoying the number of fucking idiots who play it. It's like none of them have ever played an objective based shooter like Battlefield before and just makes it far too easy and fun for those of us who have.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Shin

It's slightly annoying that people hang around waiting for planes

From what I've played it hasn't been as bad as it was before Coral Sea unlocked. Now, I've actually seen planes available with no one rushing towards them as if their life depends on it. Granted, there are still idiots who have no business flying planes getting into them (I know I can't fly a plane for shit, so I just stick to the ground where I can actually help my team), but it's nowhere near as bad as it was when the game first came out.

Ciao.

I guess as well people have realised that the planes aren't nearly as lethal as planes and helicopters can be in Battlefield 2 or Frontlines. With a decent pilot and co-pilot in a helicopter you could singlehandedly win a match of either of those. It's incredibly easy to shoot down planes in 1943 and their bombs aren't even that great.

Cheers.

I dunno.

I can win battles in a plane against an AA gun, and using it anyone can destroy mobile armour extremely well. One (or two) decent pilots can halt most heavy attacks the enemy can mount, including the bombers. I'm not saying I'm great, but if you're anything above the level of "mentally handicapped" and have a little bit of practice, the things become pretty damn strong.

I guess the level of power is offset by how idiotic they knew the player base was.

Ciao.

I think we can all agree this game would be fucking worth playing if you could start a private game with all your pals regardless of the amount of you. Join whichever side you want to fight on, and open it up for strangers if you need/want more folks in.

Until this and "my squad" is made consistent, BF 1943 can suck my huge e-dick.

Cheers.

You need enough people to populate the map to make it fun though. With too few people it'd just come down to who could run around capturing bases quickest that won, essentially the best jeep driver. I agree that losing a squad member to the other team can be frustrating but it's also kinda fun being able to kill them and then gloat about it down the mic.

As for planes vs AA guns, I've probably had more assists from hitting the plane once before the pilot stacks it into a hillside trying to get under my line of fire than I have had straight kills. I'm not saying they can't be powerful, I'm saying you need a modicum of skill to make them deadly whereas in previous games of this genre an average player can dominate a match just by launching massive barrages of rockets from a helicopter and keeping moving so the appeal of easy points is rather diminished.

Also, as with pretty much every game of this genre, there is still nothing much funnier than planting explosives on a parked plane and waiting for someone to try and fly off in it. Battlefield 2 on Xbox especially you could get monstrous amounts of points by sneaking into the main enemy base as a sniper and loading up the helicopter with C4, then getting to a safe distance and focussing your sights on the cockpit. Anytime someone climbed in you just pressed the trigger for an easy headshot and if they happened to get off the ground (If you were reloading or something), you just blew the C4. It's amazing how many people don't learn and just keep piling into the same chopper over and over getting killed the same way every time. BF2 even had the camera point at who killed you when you died and most people still wouldn't come to try and kill you.

Ciao.

Having a fucking blast with this game. Starting to get the hang of sniping. I'm still goddamn terrible with the tanks, but other than that I'm consisently placing in the top few slots. Shin's right, the sheer hugeness of the player base means you're playing with a large majority of people who are fucking terrible, which is awesome for us. Most games each team has 3-5 players that are responsible for 90% of the work of their teams.

Haven't hit any freezes or lag issues at all since I picked it up last Tuesday. That day we had squad split-up issues 3 times, but not once since then.

Originally Posted by YOU MAD

I think we can all agree this game would be fucking worth playing if you could start a private game with all your pals regardless of the amount of you. Join whichever side you want to fight on, and open it up for strangers if you need/want more folks in.

Until this and "my squad" is made consistent, BF 1943 can suck my huge e-dick.

I agree you should be able to start a game with more than 4 people (you can only go in as a single squad, right?), but I don't seem them ever making full-on private games. Unless you actually had 2 full teams I don't see the maps really working, it's already borderline too few people as is with 24 players. The game seems to be geared much more towards pick up and play style. Weird that you're still having Squad split-up issues. I haven't had it happen since last Tuesday, and it doesn't seem to be happening at all with the other people I play with either. So I don't know if we're just lucky, you're unlucky, or if they actually did specifically address that.

Personally my on real gripe (and I'm new to Battlefield so maybe this is old news) but spawning is super fucked up. If you spawn in at a base that the other team is currently trying to capture, it's a hilarious chain of either you spawning right behind them, or right in front of them. It's hilarious and awesome when you're spawn killing people as you're taking a base, but it sucks when you're trying to spawn at your base and you get knifed in the back instantly.

Also it's completely bullshit if you own the base that has the Air Raid a single dude from the other team can run in and set it off; only the team who owns the base should be able to call it

Cheers.

Originally Posted by SailorDaravon

Also it's completely bullshit if you own the base that has the Air Raid a single dude from the other team can run in and set it off; only the team who owns the base should be able to call it

No, that would be bullshit. SOmetimes if you're the only person trying to cap a point on your team, sneaking in and wiping out the defenders in one go works pretty well.

You know what should be implemented though? A limit on how many times you can use the bombers in a round. Per player I mean. If you were the last one in there, you should not be allowed to be the next one in. It would, hopefully, cause less camping of that fucking shit, it's so aggrivating.

Ciao.

Originally Posted by Shin

You need enough people to populate the map to make it fun though. With too few people it'd just come down to who could run around capturing bases quickest that won, essentially the best jeep driver. I agree that losing a squad member to the other team can be frustrating but it's also kinda fun being able to kill them and then gloat about it down the mic.

I get that it needs a certain amount of people before it can be fun. My problem is none of my other games literally require a full 8, 12, or 16 people before I can start a private match with friends. I can start them at any size. I can even start them alone if I so choose, god forbid I want to explore terrain. EA won't have none of that though, for whatever reason.

Cheers.

There's also the fact that DICE have previously put out Battlefield games capable of being played by less players that the entire map requires. I'm not sure about BF1942, but in BF2 nearly all maps could be played in various player number configurations, with the out-of-limits zone being changed (the whole "You are leaving the play area, return in XX seconds" stuff) and the number/location of bases shifting to better suit smaller numbers. Why not offer that sort of option as it'd be piss easy to do. Or hell, why not just let the players choose if they want to start a server with just two people? You can eliminate all stats gathering from private games, so people couldn't achievement whore or stats boost, simple.

I agree with you Shin, the game maps as is would be terrible with a handful of players, the odd time I ended up in a game that was only 6-8 people a side it felt pretty empty, but why not allow people to make that choice themselves?

P.S. I stuck up my review on Prime Gamer, so you can all go and post there about how you disagree with me - Prime Gamer Review: Battlefield 1943

Ciao.