Backdate battlefield

2005-10-11 06:15:09

#1

invisiduck: Aromatic; +-4|6771

Why move forward in the battlefield series, why not have Battlefield Medieval Combat, Where spec ops are like theives, with throwing knives and gunpoder, assualt are knights, with huge swords and sheild, Instead of jeeps youd have horses, tanks would be catapults, the commander would where the shiney crown, snipers would be archers n stuff like that. And the peoples liberation army would have samurai and ninjas. You might even throw the odd myth in there, wizards, dragons.

I know theyve done all this with RPG, but not a full on 64 player multi online flag capturing Action experience.

Any thoughts on this?

2005-10-11 06:38:59

#2

McCullough: Member; +7|6836

Why not move battlefield back in time. Cus it's stupid.

2005-10-11 06:51:03

#3

Home: Section.80; +447|6845|Seattle, Washington, USA

What would anti tank be? And what would the flying vehicle be? A dragon? That would just be ridiculous. No one would buy it.

2005-10-11 07:02:32

#4

r00fus: Member; +2|6789

why not just get high and play bf2? you can see whatever you want to then.

2005-10-11 07:38:42

#5

kilroy0097: Kilroy Is Here!; +81|6841|Bryan/College Station, TX

While you are imaginitive with your ideas, I believe that such a game wouldn't appeal much to this crowd. After all modern warfare at least WWI to the modern age is something that they like. While I can the appeal of a medieval combat, it just isn't interesting enough to make a game out of it. Perhaps someone will make an uber mod. But I think your little pipe dream (smoke it baby smoke it hard) may have to stay that for a long while. Enjoy the dreams.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

2005-10-11 08:29:38

#6

McGruff: Member; +0|6775

r00fus wrote:
why not just get high and play bf2? you can see whatever you want to then.

LMAO, better yet go hit a couple lines of LSD or Shrooms. That will really get you imaging shit.

2005-10-11 08:31:17

#7

Stoned_Smurfz: The Mushroom Man; +1|6844|Australia

Did i hear shrooms? lol J/K

2005-10-11 08:50:19

#8

B.Schuss: I'm back, baby... ( sort of ); +664|6839|Cologne, Germany

also, from a technical point of view, fighting with medieval weapons is really hard to build into a satisfying combat system. imagine a knife fight in BF2. it's complete chaos. now imagine a fight with 32 or 64 people using only knifes ( or swords, axes, spears, warhammers ). impossible to do, I suppose, especially from the first person view.

2005-10-11 09:27:20

#9

Rogness: The English Redneck; +10|6802|Plymouth, England

Ye Gods! You people have no imaginations!

Nah - it would be really hard to do but I think it could work, you don't have to keep everything the same as BF2. For example, it would make sense to slow it down (suits of armour, and all that) - this would make the sword fighting potentially possible (although you would need to change the controls).

Granted, it's not going to be everyone's idea of fun, but we should at least have ideas like this out there - if only to show us that it isn't possible! I would certainly give it a go, like I will most mods for BF2, and I know I can speak for all of my mates as well. Whether we keep playing it though is a different matter.

Choice is everything, even if you don't like what's on offer.

2005-10-11 09:57:29

#10

r00fus: Member; +2|6789

unless a mass amount of people would buy it with a possible expansion then no developer will make it.

2005-10-11 10:08:28

#11

bluehavoc8686: will frag for food; +11|6837|Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Wow, sorry thread-maker... you just got served. lol. I agree that warfare for the type of game that battlefield offers is probably best left to the 20th century and forward. What I would be more worried about with the series is that the next one (logically) may look like the new America's Army where it's futuristic (to a degree) and I think that that should be left to games like F.E.A.R. and such. On a personal note (no one slap me) I wouldn't mind a Battlefield WWI and I don't think any of us would complain about more BFWWII games. Then again, I wouldn't complain if they just kept making expansions for this one. However, whichever direction EA/DICE/IGN goes in for their future Battlefield tittles, they all damn well better have the stats and awards like this one! YOU HEAR THAT EA... YOU GOT US ALL HOOKED YOU BASTARDS!

2005-10-11 11:05:11

#12

r00fus: Member; +2|6789

how about battlefield: holy edition. with jesus and all of his pawns. now wouldnt that be neat? hell no it wouldnt.

2005-10-11 11:11:01

#13

PawnEKG: I can get a degree in BF2...right?; +1|6804

r00fus wrote:
how about battlefield: holy edition. with jesus and all of his pawns. now wouldnt that be neat? hell no it wouldnt.

whats wrong with pawns?? lol j/k

2005-10-11 11:22:03

#14

Docink: Member; +0|6810

The best thing wouled be to put Battlefield 2 In the Future....with Future i mean like Halo,Time Splitters 2(3)
halo is a fun Multiplayer game!

I think that wouled be a hit or something really new!

2005-10-11 14:49:40

#15

r00fus: Member; +2|6789

thats a different genre of game, try quake wars.

2005-10-12 04:33:59

#16

Rogness: The English Redneck; +10|6802|Plymouth, England

r00fus wrote:
unless a mass amount of people would buy it with a possible expansion then no developer will make it.

Why does a developer, or even EA/DICE, have to make it? Why can't some enthusiastic bedroom coder make a mod? It doesn't have to be an expansion - a total coversion mod would do.

Look at BF1942 - there's a pirate mod for it. I bet that not enough people play that for a developer to have made it, but it's still there - done by a modder.
Also, just because Quake Wars will do future combat, doesn't mean that someone shouldn't do the same for BF2. Just because you could buy Colin MacRae didn't stop someone from doing Quake Rally did it? People still played it, and it was given away on magazine coverdiscs as a showcase for what could be done if you put your mind to it.

We need that creativity out there - it's what makes the PC games scene so special (I know, I know - so does the fact that they absolutely cack on any console). In a way it saddens me to hear this idea shouted down - I am really looking forward to the first wave of mods, and I hope to God that at least some of them offer something different from what BF2 already does.

2005-10-12 04:43:17

#17

kilroy0097: Kilroy Is Here!; +81|6841|Bryan/College Station, TX

I actually wouldn't mind seeing BF1942 converted completely and revamped with the new BF2 Modern engine. Kind of like they did with Counter Strike when Half Life 2 came out. It's prettier and still remains mostly the same. That would be rather nice.

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross." - Sinclair Lewis

2005-10-12 05:00:17

#18

07>sin: mista sinista; +1|6843

invisiduck wrote:
Why move forward in the battlefield series, why not have Battlefield Medieval Combat, Where spec ops are like theives, with throwing knives and gunpoder, assualt are knights, with huge swords and sheild, Instead of jeeps youd have horses, tanks would be catapults, the commander would where the shiney crown, snipers would be archers n stuff like that. And the peoples liberation army would have samurai and ninjas. You might even throw the odd myth in there, wizards, dragons.

I know theyve done all this with RPG, but not a full on 64 player multi online flag capturing Action experience.

Any thoughts on this?

i think they should call it world of warcraft

BF2S Forums Backdate battlefield

r00fus wrote:

r00fus wrote:

r00fus wrote:

invisiduck wrote:

Board footer