Hard Light Productions Forums

Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: aldo_14 on March 15, 2004, 07:28:03 pm

Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: aldo_14 on March 15, 2004, 07:28:03 pm
Anyone buying it?  Might pick it up on Wed (know a wee shop that releases before the high street chains), 'twas just wondering.  The idea of flying a Huey appeals to me :D
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Drew on March 15, 2004, 08:21:00 pm
i never picked up 1942, but some of the promo vids/screens looked awesome.  But everytime i pick up a new game, my 256 DRR always gets in the way of me enjoying it.  If i had better hardwear i would deffenitly pick it up. Veitnam's env appeals to me alot more than 1942s
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Knight Templar on March 15, 2004, 08:47:50 pm
I haven't played 1942 in ages, but it looks pretty sweet, and I haven't had a Vietnam game yet, so yeah.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Drew on March 15, 2004, 08:51:38 pm
right now im addicted to americas army + im dedicated to a (top 5) halo clan + im broke soo...
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Knight Templar on March 15, 2004, 08:54:27 pm
Which clan?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: phreak on March 15, 2004, 09:34:08 pm
still wasting time on the UT2K4 demo.. i love the tank
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stunaep on March 15, 2004, 10:08:36 pm
I'll rather pick up the full UT2k4, thank you very much.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 16, 2004, 03:10:52 am
Nah, UT2k4 is a poor shadow of Battlefield as far as vehicles are concerned. I'm beginning to lose faith in Epic. I'll be picked up BF:V the minute it hits store shelves.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Turnsky on March 16, 2004, 03:45:59 am
i'll be getting it as soon as i can, maybe it'd be my first taste of hardcore online play..;)
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Ashrak on March 16, 2004, 04:31:15 am
reDl ing it later :p
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: J3Vr6 on March 16, 2004, 07:54:02 am
Is 1942 only multiplayer?  Not point in me getting it then as I have no phone at home :(
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 16, 2004, 08:09:11 am
There was a single player element in the first BF1942 game - however its worth noting the shoddy AI that came with it (you won't get the best possible experience from the game unless you play online, as with Quake 3, UT2k3/4 or any other game of a similar nature).
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stunaep on March 16, 2004, 08:15:44 am
Quote
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Nah, UT2k4 is a poor shadow of Battlefield as far as vehicles are concerned. I'm beginning to lose faith in Epic. I'll be picked up BF:V the minute it hits store shelves.


Perhaps, but does BF:V scream HOLY SHIT when you score 6 kills in a row?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Nico on March 16, 2004, 08:17:34 am
Quote
Originally posted by Turnsky
i'll be getting it as soon as i can, maybe it'd be my first taste of hardcore online play..;)


mmh... multiplayer hardcore play?
gangbang!
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Turnsky on March 16, 2004, 08:24:44 am
Quote
Originally posted by Nico


mmh... multiplayer hardcore play?
gangbang!


words cannot fathom on how much i hate you right now :p
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Gloriano on March 16, 2004, 08:24:50 am
:lol:

anyway I gonna buy BF:V as soon posipple cos BF:1942 was one of my favorite games
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Ghostavo on March 16, 2004, 08:31:38 am
It's extremelly dificult to control an helicopter... wait... let me rephrase that... it's extremelly dificult to acurately control an helicopter!

The infantary class got totally mixed up, for example, the "anti-tank" infantary class has a much better machine gun than the "assault" infantary class. Tanks are much weaker now (not sure if that's a plus or a minus) and the single-player is a bit worse than in the original. That said, I believe even with these flaws it's a pretty damn good game but only if you play it in multiplayer. Singleplayer is... a bit fustrating. :(
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Janos on March 16, 2004, 08:31:58 am
Can BF:V beat Eve of Destruction or whatever that Nam mod for 1942 is called?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stealth[cro] on March 16, 2004, 09:17:54 am
UT2k4 is overrated... As far as I've seen, the engine only had a slight facelift (unlike FS, for instance :D), the vehicle support is nothing UT2k3 didn't have (except they were too lazy to make more vehicles and stick a couple of maps in), and frankly, I don't think 6 CDs help it either. 40 out of ~60 maps will be recycles from 2k3, the new modes still (probably) won't live up to the old Assault UT had...

In BF:V I trust ;)
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: aldo_14 on March 16, 2004, 09:53:43 am
Quote
Originally posted by Janos
Can BF:V beat Eve of Destruction or whatever that Nam mod for 1942 is called?


It should, what with being a professional effort and all.  From what I've read, the choper support it better.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stunaep on March 16, 2004, 10:19:36 am
Quote
I don't think 6 CDs help it either. 40 out of ~60 maps will be recycles from 2k3, the new modes still (probably) won't live up to the old Assault UT had...


*ahem* that'd be 100 maps. It's got the maps of UT2k3, plus 60 more.

And Onslaught and the new assault are already more fun than anything in the old UT. Including assault
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Nico on March 16, 2004, 10:26:11 am
Quote
Originally posted by Turnsky


words cannot fathom on how much i hate you right now :p


mmh, liar :D
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stryke 9 on March 16, 2004, 11:58:40 am
Ugh, BF1942. I swear, if my computer had a soul, that game would have devoured it. It's enough that it nearly destroyed the rest of it.

If you've got 1942, and it works, good for you. Bastard. Enjoy Vietnam, it looks fun. If you haven't bought something of the series yet, don't. From what I've seen happen to my and my friends' computers, you've got a 50/50 chance of it either working or summoning Satan directly onto your hard disk, and while it seems a nifty game it's absolutely not worth the risk of semipermanent damage. Fantastic idea for a game, now if only they could find some coders who could write their name without making it somehow ****in' viral.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Mr Carrot on March 16, 2004, 02:00:58 pm
Unless youve got a gig of ram dont bother the maps take FING ages to load.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 16, 2004, 02:11:31 pm
Nah, 512 isn't to bad for it - more will certainly help.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Drew on March 16, 2004, 03:57:30 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Knight Templar
Which clan?


]word[


if i even had 512 i would be a happy camper.....
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: J3Vr6 on March 16, 2004, 04:01:58 pm
So what are the system specs for 1942?  Maybe when I get a phone in my apartment I'll look into getting this game.  Is it a pay for play, like a prostitute?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 16, 2004, 04:04:09 pm
It's not pay to play, just buy and play as much as you like for as long as a server exists for it (or indeed, play offline *shudders*).

As for specs... well the original BF:1942 will run on a medium spec system, but obviously the better the computer - the better the performance you'll see. What have you got?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Ghostavo on March 16, 2004, 04:08:12 pm
Actually BF: V seems to require a bit more than the original. In the "old" one I ran with max bots (that's right, 64 :D) without medium/high resolution with many "bumps" (with medium resolution it was flawless), this one... seems to slow down my comp consideratly by running with 30 bots in medium resolution.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stealth[cro] on March 16, 2004, 05:03:56 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Stunaep


*ahem* that'd be 100 maps. It's got the maps of UT2k3, plus 60 more.

And Onslaught and the new assault are already more fun than anything in the old UT. Including assault

Mea culpa, Stunaep. I still don't think it's much more than a riced up version of 2003. I mean, 2003 was fun for a while, but it lost part of the fun factor, at least to me.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Mr Carrot on March 16, 2004, 05:24:43 pm
Itl run its just the loading times.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Grey Wolf on March 16, 2004, 06:04:13 pm
UT2k4's Onslaught mode is actually quite fun, at least in the demo. As is taking a tank into your enemies' base to take ou the power core :)
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 16, 2004, 06:11:18 pm
Agreed, but it doesn't exactly justify a new game to be made out of an old engine.

(alright, granted the engine does look nice but its as bit of a Fifa Soccer kind of move to start doing this by the year without many changes. Unfortunately, people will pay that money and give everyone the idea that it's acceptable).
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Ghostavo on March 16, 2004, 06:17:17 pm
Er... you mean like Jedi Academy using the old Quake 3 engine? :D :p
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 16, 2004, 06:22:53 pm
I suppose it is worth noting that so many things use Half Lifes engine...

But that's not the point, I just don't think UT2K4 is worth the money one has to pay for it. It's a large expansion pack - not a game and not a refinement of the art of FPS...

...(which reached its best with Quake3, the slickest of the bunch. Unreal Tournament - while not entirely beautiful all the time was a slower paced and well thought out angle on the FPS...

But as I've said, I see FPS's (online at least) becoming either digital battlefields - BF1942 but larger, longer, more depth. Essentially a new and highly detailed world recreated online for the soul purpose of combat.

Or it becomes the slickest, fastest, most graphically pleasing yet simple to play shooter - Quake 3 with a face lift - no vehicles to worry about, just various guns - people to shoot them at - and an arena. Reactions and knowlege of the game will win out over anything else here.

But thats just how I see it :P
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stunaep on March 16, 2004, 11:35:40 pm
Actually, I've never understood what people see in Q3. I mean, it's got 6 weapons, a bunch of maps that all look and play the same, and no game modes to speak of.

UT beats that anytime.

And, well, thousands of games are made today with only minor additions to the Quake 3 engine code. The UT2k4 net code has been totally rewritten, it's got two new play modes, and for CHRISSAKES IT'S GOT 60 NEW MAPS!
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Bobboau on March 16, 2004, 11:39:47 pm
Qake is Teh lEee377T1!!!!!127d#5N%^;
Jou 1s Teh 14m3R!!1!!11
haHAhahAhAHaHA!!!!!!!!!

becase people like  ^that^ play it
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: phreak on March 16, 2004, 11:47:53 pm
well i do notice my ping is better from 2k3

besides, UT has nuclear ****ing weapons
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Knight Templar on March 17, 2004, 12:35:30 am
:thepimp:

Halo > UT2K4
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: phreak on March 17, 2004, 12:57:21 am
does halo have a built-in jukebox so you can blast puppetz or slayer without having to resort to a boombox or winamp?

i must say, Raining Blood does fit well when playing 2k4
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Knight Templar on March 17, 2004, 01:06:49 am
Well, if you are feeling queer, you can use Windows Media player. :)
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 17, 2004, 03:52:31 am
BF:Vietnam also has built in music playing capabilities, though you have to be in a vehicle to make use of them (which unfortunately may add to vehicle camping).

Stunaep, yeah you're right about Q3s lack of substance - but as a twitch shooter it's probably still one of the smoothest out there. The UT brand seems to be trying to compromise between that and vehicle warfare... but right now I just don't think it has it right.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Nico on March 17, 2004, 04:17:50 am
For now, only renegade really has vehicles down right, imho. Well balanced and easy to control.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 17, 2004, 04:22:54 am
Not actually disagreeing with you at all... but BF1942s feel very well balanced indeed... and they're easy as hell to control with a few exceptions / issues (tanks taking damage from standing one foot in water? Yeah..)
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: J3Vr6 on March 17, 2004, 08:18:23 am
Well, I can't play the game anyway even if I did have a phone.  You need a minimum of a 64 meg graphics card (who wants to play at the minimum specs anyway?) and I only have a geforce 2 mx 32 megger...

Oh well, it was a tease.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 17, 2004, 11:36:19 am
(http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2004/20040317l.jpg)
Apparently, it's complicated :rolleyes:
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Stealth[cro] on March 17, 2004, 02:19:33 pm
Quote
Originally posted by Bobboau
Qake is Teh lEee377T1!!!!!127d#5N%^;
Jou 1s Teh 14m3R!!1!!11
haHAhahAhAHaHA!!!!!!!!!

becase people like  ^that^ play it

I'll assume you're talking of the Q3 scene nowadays...
'course, back in the old days, the Q2 was full of cretins as well, except in Q2 you had more ways of keeping them down ;)

Quote
Originally posted by Nico
For now, only renegade really has vehicles down right, imho. Well balanced and easy to control.

Renegade is a fun game overall, I'll grant oyu that, but other than the MP mode I don't think there's much to it... Somehow the game feels hollow IMO.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: aldo_14 on March 20, 2004, 04:53:57 pm
Don't buy BF:V..... I did, and it's a buggy mess.  Great gameplay, sure - but the program itself is monumentally ****ed up.... I get lag on singleplayer.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Knight Templar on March 20, 2004, 05:23:12 pm
Eghh

*loosens collar*
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 21, 2004, 04:15:49 am
aldo_14 does have a point, there's work to be done and no mistake (multiplayer ranges from smooth as anything.. almost singleplayer) to slow-as-heck with judders and lag like nothing I've seen before.

That said, it's great fun to play.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: 01010 on March 21, 2004, 04:50:11 am
Wasn't 1942 a mess when it was first released though?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 21, 2004, 05:04:43 am
Very, yes.

Actually my biggest gripe with the game isn't that the performance can be iffy. It's that they completely raped the radio commands. Everything is gone! You can't even say the stuff you used to be able to, which was really useful! It's bloody rediculous.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Gloriano on March 21, 2004, 05:08:31 am
few days ago I did buy BF:V and I'am kinda dispointed because of bug's.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: aldo_14 on March 21, 2004, 07:39:39 am
Quote
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Very, yes.

Actually my biggest gripe with the game isn't that the performance can be iffy. It's that they completely raped the radio commands. Everything is gone! You can't even say the stuff you used to be able to, which was really useful! It's bloody rediculous.


What stuff?
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Fineus on March 21, 2004, 08:11:30 am
Well as far as I can tell, the selection is limited to F1 through F8 for a variety of commands. But I'm not even sure you can specify what kind of enemy you've seen anymore (in BF1942 you could yell "enemy ship spotted". There's no such command in BF:V).

Also, some of the lag really is terrible. I just came off a server based in the West Midlands in Britain (about 400 miles at most from where I live). I had a ping of 500 at times.

It has issues still.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: aldo_14 on March 21, 2004, 08:26:10 am
Quote
Originally posted by Kalfireth
Well as far as I can tell, the selection is limited to F1 through F8 for a variety of commands. But I'm not even sure you can specify what kind of enemy you've seen anymore (in BF1942 you could yell "enemy ship spotted". There's no such command in BF:V).

Also, some of the lag really is terrible. I just came off a server based in the West Midlands in Britain (about 400 miles at most from where I live). I had a ping of 500 at times.

It has issues still.


Well, the 'complex' radio commands are disabled by default, so maybe that's it (you can defo call out stuff like 'enemy armour spotted', etc.  

EDIT - try checking the 'expanded radio commands' in the profile screen

Lag... I don't get 'ping lag' - it's the actual gfx engine that lags for me.  i.e. the fps oscillates, sometimes halving...... as if there was heavy lag. It's apparently a very common problem - there's a myriad of posts on it on the planetbattlefield forums.

It is, to be fair, a great game - when it works properly.  The problem is that it doesn't :(.
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: Thorn on March 21, 2004, 05:54:18 pm
I like the new "radio"
*hops in a chopper and cranks Ride of the Valkyries*
Title: Battlefield Vietnam
Post by: aldo_14 on March 22, 2004, 05:20:41 am
Returned it after 4 days..... I can;t be bothered to wait on a patch which may or may not fix it - especially when the developers have **** all idea what is going wrong.