Battlfield-Heroes : Trailer

[mindless_moder]

They finally have some gameplay out , it looks ok i guess but i hate the fact that it isnt a FPS. It looks like a new fresh take on an old genre.
KYQP-uBijWg

[Lucid]

Looks like a blast. :D

[MRG]

ROTFLMFAO!!!

I so wanna be that guy sitting on the wing!!

This looks hella fun!

-MRG

[Stigmata]

You can sit on the wings of a plane and shoot people.

Game of the decade.

[Lucid]

It sounds and looks like they're taking notes and stuff from their earlier game Codename Eagle.

[Stigmata]

Codename Eagle was one of the best worst games I've ever played.

[Lucid]

Codename Eagle was awesome online, loading up massive bi-plane bomber things with people all across the wings and doing stunts and stuff.

[Stigmata]

By the time I found out about Codename Eagle, the entire community had disappeared. What little time I played it was spent in empty servers flying biplanes upside-down underneath bridges and cranes, and trying to take down planes with flamethrowers while the pilots tried to run me over without killing me.

[Adrik_Senturu]

So yeah that looks like tons of fun.

[phantomdesign]

Looks fun! Wonder if they're going to pay for it with advertising; which I don't really mind if it's completely free & the ads don't overtake the game.

[Vegeta897]

Damn, it's so great to see something so original. Bravo, good show, etc.

Edit:

I bet they'll make money by having things you can buy to customize your characters etc.

Which is lame but it's better than having to pay to get the game. Dare I say even better than ads, 'cuz not many people (including me) care about buying a funny pink hat with sparkling feathers for my soldier.

[Wanted Bob]

Looks really awesome but the "free" idea is suspicious....

[Pesmerga]

I lol'd at the pirate bay reference.

[99.vikram]

EA says they won't sell weapons for money, but some 'items' can be bought to give you an edge in combat/leveling up.
If the items aren't too game breaking it could work.

[CyberPitz]

I lol'd at the pirate bay reference.

Agreed.

I kind of want to play this now :D

[AHA-Lambda]

I lol'd at the pirate bay reference.

This

This game looks like it could be fun :D

[-Psy-]

Want this.

[Gorgon]

Sweet :d

[AiM]

Damn, it's so great to see something so original. Bravo, good show, etc.

Edit:

I bet they'll make money by having things you can buy to customize your characters etc.

Which is lame but it's better than having to pay to get the game. Dare I say even better than ads, 'cuz not many people (including me) care about buying a funny pink hat with sparkling feathers for my soldier.

It's a bit more than that, essentially people who pay will get level-up bonuses and whatnot (in-game advantages). In other words, it's modeled after basically every "free" micro-transaction game out there.

This one will easily beat the others as the 'best' one I guess, but that doesn't say much since most of those games are crap to begin with. Personally, I don't like the business model (spend constant money just to play on an even field? **** that) but since it's 'free' I'll still play it and see how it goes.

[Mutley]

Looks wank.

But hell, for free, it's worth a try. :)

[Korgoth]

It's a bit more than that, essentially people who pay will get level-up bonuses and whatnot (in-game advantages). In other words, it's modeled after basically every "free" micro-transaction game out there.

This one will easily beat the others as the 'best' one I guess, but that doesn't say much since most of those games are crap to begin with. Personally, I don't like the business model (spend constant money just to play on an even field? **** that) but since it's 'free' I'll still play it and see how it goes.

I don't think you have to worry about paying to play on a level playing field with everyone, it says that you get skill matched with others, so if you don't have the big guns cuz you didn't buy them, then you get sent to a server with people who have similar items. Sounds alright to me.

[AiM]

I don't think you have to worry about paying to play on a level playing field with everyone, it says that you get skill matched with others, so if you don't have the big guns cuz you didn't buy them, then you get sent to a server with people who have similar items. Sounds alright to me.

Well I think the system will be designed more along the lines of pairing people who have similar Kill:Death ratio and Point-per-minute (from previous BattleField games). People who purchase these micro-transaction want to have an advantage over those who don't, so I don't think EA will match players with items only against other players with items.

[smwScott]

This is clearly a ploy to break these online action games into the casual "Peggle" market. It's going to be an easy to play, mildly entertaining game that draws in the very casual crows ... and leaches money off of them with micro-transactions. Seeing as it's EA you're probably going to have pretty significant advantages the more you spend, fueling people to spend more and more money. Also seeing as it's EA it will be filled to the brim with advertisements, given their retail games look like what free "ad-supported" games should be.

I don't have high hopes for this game at all. A poor man's TF2.

[RyanG]

I think this is going to be one of those "could be fun, could be stupid" games.
I'm not a battlefield player (god forbid, right?), so I'm probably not as excited as some people. But it looks like it could be interesting.

[Direwolf]

As far as I'm concerned Spore, Burnout, Mass Effect, and previous Battlefield games all make the "it will suck because its from EA" argument a stupid one. Now, it might suck anyway, but we're a bit past the days when just having EA's name on it is enough to rule out a game.

[Korgoth]

As far as I'm concerned Spore, Burnout, Mass Effect, and previous Battlefield games all make the "it will suck because its from EA" argument a stupid one. Now, it might suck anyway, but we're a bit past the days when just having EA's name on it is enough to rule out a game.

Well at this rate, EA owns every developer, so if we stuck to that motto, we'd have to all find a new hobby lol

[AiM]

Seeing how there's only three classes, 3 weapons and max of only 16 players... this is a highly stripped-down shell of the actual BattleField series.

Meh.

[Vegeta897]

16 players max? wtf?

[Pesmerga]

16 players max? wtf?

[phantomdesign]

Seeing how there's only three classes, 3 weapons and max of only 16 players... this is a highly stripped-down shell of the actual BattleField series.

Meh.

I missed that info! Seems like a waste; programming more weapons and classes & weapons would be easy once you have the infrastructure in place.

[smwScott]

I missed that info! Seems like a waste; programming more weapons and classes & weapons would be easy once you have the infrastructure in place.

They'll probably make you buy them later.

Not kidding.

[kupocake]

Looks interesting, but as far as the character animation goes, doesn't anyone else think that they somehow mixed up 'cartoony' with 'vaguely homosexual'?

[Kyorisu]

/me wonders if this game will suffer from the infamous server crashes BF is known for.

[phantomdesign]

They'll probably make you buy them later.

Not kidding.

Yea, thought that immediately after I posted.

[ĐynastҰ]

Looks like Warpigs mixed with TF2, could be fun if they keep it stable, and their 'matchmaking' system works out.

Good trailer though, gave me a little chuckle.

[Narvi]

Looks far too fun to exist. Is it a browser based game?

[Direwolf]

The whole idea of putting the thing out there for free and getting most of the support from advertising means that theres a real incentive for them to start adding stuff in immediately and regularly. The 16 player cap is probably a design choice, but the small number of weapons and vehicles I would expect to get expanded very quickly, and I'd be very surprised if it was all pay content, since that would kill this game very quickly.

[redruM]

It looks very fun, it's awesome that it's free altho I'm certain there will be some sort of "twist" involved but one thing that really doesn't appeal to me is the third-person perspective. Does anyone know if that's the final version or if we'll at least be able to switch betwwen FP and TP?

[i am HOLLYWOOD]

I just hope its not the kinda advertisements they pulled with the "free" PoP and FarCry. . . *shutters*

the 16 player bit doesn't bother me, because in all honesty, really big games (40+players) = ridiculous ping and not that great gameplay.

most devs these days agree 16 is the sweet spot. at least so i've heard lately.

but the artstyle excites me. for some odd reason . . .

[AiM]

I just hope its not the kinda advertisements they pulled with the "free" PoP and FarCry. . . *shutters*

the 16 player bit doesn't bother me, because in all honesty, really big games (40+players) = ridiculous ping and not that great gameplay.

most devs these days agree 16 is the sweet spot. at least so i've heard lately.

but the artstyle excites me. for some odd reason . . .

Thing is, this is BattleField... where the core gameplay IS large-scale battles. What fun is there flying a plane when you can barely find soldiers / tanks to kill? This isn't CS where larger number of players usually means it's a detriment to gameplay due to the small chokepoint based maps.

After reading the various previews around, I've really lost almost all interest in it. The whole dumbing down the series thing really doesn't appeal to me at all. Planes are now apparently incredibly easy to fly, 64 players reduced to 16, barely any classes, virtually no weapon selection and you're stuck playing one class with that account. "The most in-depth BattleField" my ass.

Add-in the whole 'microtransaction' bullshit and you've basically got every 'free mmo / shooter / whatever' available, and they're all shite. You can bet your ass that those 'microtransaction' weapons / items WILL grant those players advantages. I've only got one thing to say to that, **** the whole nickle-and-dime business model.

[Direwolf]

I'd like to point out again that this isn't Battlefield 3, which is known to be in development although no details have been revealed yet. So it's not a "dumbing down" of the series, it's really just an experiment. I whole-heartedly support the idea of a developer, and one published by EA no less, going out and try something to see if it'll work.

[AiM]

Might I ask what exactly are they experimenting? All I see is DICE stripping BF everything that makes it unique, then adding in cartoon graphics and microtransactions. The only new worthwhile thing I see is the addition of "abilities" which tbh, doesn't sound appealing or special at all.

I'd imagine this game will fall directly under the 'Casual Games' in EA's new segmented departments, which typically means dumbed-down game to suit the masses.

[Direwolf]

And nothing about EA releasing a game for free seems different than we're used to from them?

[AiM]

And nothing about EA releasing a game for free seems different than we're used to from them?

No different than the various "free" games that saturate the market already.

E.g. GunZ, WarRock, etc.

Granted, this will at least look better and probably play better than those... but considering those games are utter shit, that's not exactly hard to do.

I wouldn't be so negative if they hadn't gone with the whole nickle-and-dime bullshit. I mean, try to name one game that uses this strategy which is better than the traditional 'pay $50 and enjoy the rest' game.

[Bad^Hat]

I'd imagine this game will fall directly under the 'Casual Games' in EA's new segmented departments, which typically means dumbed-down game to suit the masses.
I'm fairly certain that's what they have in mind, yeh.

Dumbed-down from what, though? How much lower down the rope can you get from people sitting on plane wings whilst barrel rolling?

I'd also like to point out that dumb and fun are not mutually exclusive.