HCG Review: Battlefield 1943
Posted July 14th, 2009 in Articles, Microsoft, PS3, PlayStation Network, Sony, Xbox 360, Xbox Live by Adam Robinson
After several days of headaches brought about by trying to get into matches, I can now confidently review EA and DICE’s Battlefield 1942 download-only sequel, Battlefield 1943. I wish I was joking about the online issues, but sadly they were quite real. Getting into a quick match was incredibly difficult, and playing with friends was all but impossible. DICE stepped up though, adding several additional servers and ironing out most of the connection wrinkles prohibiting gamers from getting into matches.
These issues seem to have largely existed on the Xbox Live side of things, as there are far fewer reports of connectivity issues from PlayStation Network users. I played the Xbox Live Arcade version of Battlefield 1943 for review purposes, but the PSN version is identical in form and function, so PS3 owners may feel free to use my review to aid in their buying decisions.
So, after all those headaches, was the game worth waiting for? The answer to that question depends largely on what kind of gamer you are. If you’re a fan of Battlefield 1942, the answer is an enthusiastic “yes.” Although the DICE team behind 1943 did not develop the original, they paid great homage to the PC classic, and even improved upon the already-stellar gameplay with a few tweaks. Ammo is now infinite; snipers can’t go prone; teams are limited to 12 players; and so on.
And of course the classic Battlefield 1942 gameplay formula is still intact: two forces vie for control of various points on a map. Players can choose from three classes with which to wreck havoc: infantry (close-range soldier), scout (sniper), and rifleman (long-range soldier). There’s nothing fancy at play here, but it’s all extremely polished and balanced. Winning or losing is entirely dependent on your skill, not on exploiting quirks or design flaws. Win or lose, all players rank up based on points accumulated during battle. The better you fight, the more points you’ll earn.
Battlefield 1943 uses the Frostbite Engine from Battlefield: Bad Company, so stuff blows up quite well, and everything looks beautiful—before and after exploding. Explosions and gunfire sound nice, especially on a good surround system, but there’s strangely little in the way of music. I don’t suppose music is necessary when your team is laughing and playfully mocking one another as bullets fly and bombs drop. Of course if anyone is in need of music, the Xbox Live Arcade version supports custom soundtracks (not sure about the PSN version).
By now you’re probably wondering Hey, what about folks who aren’t fans of Battlefield 1942? I’m getting to that. If you call yourself a multiplayer shooter fan, you owe it to yourself to pony up the dough for Battlefield 1943. Sure, it’s pricey for a downloadable game (1200 MS Points on XBLA and $14.99 on PSN), but worth every penny considering the wealth of great content. Naturally, if multiplayer and/or first-person shooters don’t sit well with you, feel free to stay away.
I am not the biggest fan of FPS games but I love this game, it is well worth the 1200 MSP and the coral sea map should be unlocked later today (Xbox 360 at 39 million kills, “only” 4 million more to go)
I might pick this game up £10.28 is a reasonable price for a game, but I dont know if it has a lot of replay value is there a ranking system are there unlockables?
@SoulPursuer: yes, there is a ranking system. I’ll update the review to mention that. No unlockables that I’m aware of.
Played the trial version and I’m very tempted to buy the full game. I love these kind of games where you can be creative in your attack (REALLY creative)
DICE did develop the original BF1942.
Yes Sean, DICE did, but nobody on the DICE team that developed 1942 worked on 1943. In fact, none of those guys work for DICE anymore. I should have been more specific, but there ya go.
Nice review except that you didn’t mention anything negative about it other than server problems(not the game). You only give the good things about the game. Why not mention some of the negative?
In my experience with the game, Vulture, I found that 95% of the things I hated about the game were player-related (meaning it was something a jerk player did). The remaining 5% is mostly server issues and lag.
so you feel that the game itself is 100% ?
Vulture, if you really feel that opposed to my opinion of the game, feel free to write a counter-review. I’ll even post it if you like.
I’m not trying to be like that at all. I’m just asking if you feel the game was 100% since you didn’t include anything wrong with it. If I’m going to read a review of anything, I like to know the pros and the cons of it. That’s why I posted at all. Your response makes it seem like the game has absolutely nothing wrong with, only server and user errors. Take it for what it’s worth….
Yo i love this game and i love shooters so that helps.Planes are great to fly and the classes balance each other out . Truly a great buy for an arcade game.
The worry is when the map packs start coming out and the game turns into a $30 game for six maps…
Good game, but I’ll pass.