If you're hoping to hone your Battlefield skills before the Bad Company returns later this year, you'll get your chance this summer when the series goes back to WWII with Battlefield 1943, a multiplayer game coming to XBLA, PSN [updated: and PC!]. Built on the same engine as Bad Company, the downloadable game will offer 24 players the chance to battle it out across Wake Island, Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima.
Listen, we try to be skeptical of newly announced titles until they've proven themselves, but holy crap are we ever excited about this.
Oh yeah, and in other Battlefield news, the first screenshot of Bad Company 2 has been revealed. Check it out after the break.
Reader Comments (96)
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 9:55AM (Unverified) said
This could be a nice snack before BC2. Me likes.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 9:56AM (Unverified) said
Looks ridiculously sweet as I was a HUGE BF2 fan (so Wake Island looks lushious) but whats with the 24 player caps? I want 64 player caps, just like the PC version :D
Reply
Posted: Feb 6th 2009 2:46PM corneliusm said
Speaking as a former game dev:
It's mostly a performance bottleneck. PC versions can have higher player caps simply because they're faster. Even though we have fast dedicated servers that handle all of the server-side data, clients (aka, PCs and consoles) still have to process data received by the server at regular intervals. This space is limited, not just due to network bandwidth and latency, but because the client needs to accept the packet, process it, update and resend its own data.
And the client needs perform this turnaround as quickly as possible. Otherwise you have to start doing full resyncs to catch the client back up- most of the packets sent from the server are deltas, so they can be smaller. And you start to get clients teleporting, lagging, or dropping out due to network timeouts. It's not pretty.
Plus, it also helps that network controllers gaming PCs are much better than the ones found in consoles, due to having a much faster bus.
The current console generation (PS3, 360) are ~1/4 as fast (general processing-wise) as your typical gaming PC.
Reply
It's mostly a performance bottleneck. PC versions can have higher player caps simply because they're faster. Even though we have fast dedicated servers that handle all of the server-side data, clients (aka, PCs and consoles) still have to process data received by the server at regular intervals. This space is limited, not just due to network bandwidth and latency, but because the client needs to accept the packet, process it, update and resend its own data.
And the client needs perform this turnaround as quickly as possible. Otherwise you have to start doing full resyncs to catch the client back up- most of the packets sent from the server are deltas, so they can be smaller. And you start to get clients teleporting, lagging, or dropping out due to network timeouts. It's not pretty.
Plus, it also helps that network controllers gaming PCs are much better than the ones found in consoles, due to having a much faster bus.
The current console generation (PS3, 360) are ~1/4 as fast (general processing-wise) as your typical gaming PC.
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 9:58AM (Unverified) said
The clincher for this would be if the buildings are leveled by carpet bombing. If so, SOLD!
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 2:39PM (Unverified) said
The building can be completely destroyed. Gamespot had a video up, I think it is called start select, or something, and they did mention that the building coud be completely destroyed.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 9:59AM (Unverified) said
Will this still have destructible environments I wonder? Who knows? God and DICE know.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:02AM xGeneral DEATHxDEETH82 said
I used to love going into 64-player servers on BF1942 and wreaking havoc with the tanks. Not only were they powerful, but they were faster than most tanks in other shooters. This will be a Day One for me.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:07AM (Unverified) said
sweet, but the player cap could at least been 32, because i think it was 64 on the pc. still freakin awsome though as an arcade game i hope this is a new trend what with cell factor doing the same thing.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:27AM HardBoiled2009 said
only battlefields i play was 2 and 2142 .. didn't care bout the first ones ... but i only own 2142 .. tho it's more of a Battlefield 2 title but at the .5 at the end
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:20AM Bowlby said
Looks pretty but let's see how it plays first. The gameplay in that video looks awesome but if I know the Battlefield community, this is what I'll probably see in my first game - I'll get into a server, get kiled by a tank shell, respawn at a base, get artillery spammed to hell, spawn again, die from some camping lamer and finally, respawn at the main base, only to see half a dozen guys camping the plane spawn.
Call me cynical.
Reply
Call me cynical.
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:24AM PedoJokerBear said
WANT!!! 24 players is good in itself but damn if it was 64...WOO
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 12:40PM (Unverified) said
I agree. Arcade games should be free. Or very close to free. I would pay 20 MS points for that. But no more. I've got Aegis Wing! I don't need this stupid game.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:33AM (Unverified) said
No. I'm desperate for BF3 as well. I'm thoroughly dissapointed they are releasing another add on esque game instead of a true sequel. It's been 4 years and still no sign of a sequel to BF2.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:40AM Bailers77 said
I'm waiting too, but at least with this updated 1942 we can now make mad rushes at the start and shoot our teammates in the back if they get too close to the airplanes in higher definition graphics.
My general question is, what would BF3 bring? Better graphics I'm sure, but what setting? Vietnam? Korea? Has anyone seen a Korea War game at all?
Reply
My general question is, what would BF3 bring? Better graphics I'm sure, but what setting? Vietnam? Korea? Has anyone seen a Korea War game at all?
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 1:03PM (Unverified) said
Battlefield Vietnam was released in 2004 Bailers.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 1:39PM Bailers77 said
I know that there has been WWII, Vietnam, and Modern Combat era games. Then there was future wars (2142? Can't remember the exact title right now). What I'm saying is would they just re-boot battlefield 2, with new weapons or tricks, or try something different.
Seriously, I'm wondering what BF3 would offer other than an updated BF2. I loved BF2, so if they just upgrade that I'd be happy. But just wondering.
Reply
Seriously, I'm wondering what BF3 would offer other than an updated BF2. I loved BF2, so if they just upgrade that I'd be happy. But just wondering.
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 7:21PM Stupidiot said
Personally I'd like to see a remake of 1942, with larger maps, new battlegrounds and all the other new-gen benefits (PC centric of course).
I have to say it was my favourite multiplayer experience ever, especially with all the mods made available for it. (I still think BF modern combat for 1942 and PoE for Vietnam match up to BF2 :p).
Reply
I have to say it was my favourite multiplayer experience ever, especially with all the mods made available for it. (I still think BF modern combat for 1942 and PoE for Vietnam match up to BF2 :p).
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:34AM (Unverified) said
watching this video makes me want to play some BF2 or BF1942.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:34AM (Unverified) said
no... ive been waiting on that forever. I get the feeling that there is not such thing though since pc games dont make money anymore. Maybe we'll see a battlefield 3 on the new xbox?
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:52AM TravisAdams said
the only thing that bums me out a bit is only 2 levels. who wants to bet they'll use that for pay dlc. just hope it's cheap so it doesn't feel like getting worked over on the DLC.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:52AM (Unverified) said
Looks great, and intense.
Notice the Gangs of New York music at the end?
Reply
Notice the Gangs of New York music at the end?
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 10:58AM busydoinnothin said
Perfect timing. I've been thinking lately about how much I miss me some Battlefield action. I had a lot of fun with 1942, and dug BF2 as well. I just hope the engine is improved so that the infantry combat feels more smooth like other FPS's. I've always hated how infantry combat felt in the Battlefield games.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:01AM (Unverified) said
Hm, this + Battlefield Heroes is going to be quite nice.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:03AM (Unverified) said
This is warhawk...with nicer explosions and more realistic planes.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:17AM (Unverified) said
yeah total warhawk ripoff dude. i remember playing warhawk on ps3 back in 2000 before any these battlefield games came out.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:19AM Android Overlord said
It's nothing like warhawk whatsoever. I recommend you research the battlefield series.
Reply
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:14AM (Unverified) said
And I thought this year was going to be quiet.
It looks awesome and B:BC2 Kickass.
I never got all the achievements some of them requiere you to be in a clan or something.
Reply
It looks awesome and B:BC2 Kickass.
I never got all the achievements some of them requiere you to be in a clan or something.
Posted: Feb 5th 2009 11:17AM (Unverified) said
I hope only the gimped console versions are limited to 24 players. Otherwise, as much as I loved BF1942 (it's probably my favorite FPS), I might have to pass this up until they address that.
What's the deal with the BF franchise? BF2 got some crappy expansions and then they rushed out BF2142, but since then all we get is some downloadable crap like this and BF Heroes? I hope BF2142's lackluster performance didn't get them thinking we were sick of the franchise as a whole!
Reply
What's the deal with the BF franchise? BF2 got some crappy expansions and then they rushed out BF2142, but since then all we get is some downloadable crap like this and BF Heroes? I hope BF2142's lackluster performance didn't get them thinking we were sick of the franchise as a whole!
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 218 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 151 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 107 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments
- Battleship movie adapted into FPS by Double Helix 92 comments











