How do you make a sequel to one of the most popular multiplayer shooters in recent history? Do you take it a step further by tacking on some innovating new concept? Then you'd have to partially reinvent the gameplay, which is not something developers are keen on doing - especially when they're on EA's payroll; and besides, setting a game in a specific historic period does carry with it certain limitations. Those of you who are following the trends in the gaming industry know that EA is acknowledged for spotting talent and then basically milking their original concepts for all they're worth. The Sims certainly comes to mind here, as well as the Medal of Honor series. In a way, this is a bulletproof business plan, and that's why they're the number one game publisher at the moment. So with the release of a new Battlefield game a question looms in the air: will it suffer the same fate as the abovementioned series? Read on to find out; or just skip to the conclusion if you're lazy and hate to read (like me! - Six).A word from our sponsors:
We've already covered Battlefield: Vietnam up the wazoo, with two previews and numerous news reports. So if you're still not in the know as to what features are new in this game, what is the historical background, or anything else relating to the new features, I suggest you give these articles a read. In this review I'll try to answer several "simple" questions: does the sequel advance the franchise in any way, and is it as fun as the original game.
I don't know if you know this, but DICE, who only had BF1942 published by EA, are now owned by them. On the upside, it is very apparent right from the start that Battlefield: Vietnam has received a visual and audio makeover that screams five-star PC game production all the way. EA is keen on investing money in profitable projects. The menus look funky, but very, very professional and graphically perfected, and the musical tracks featured in the game are fully licensed and do wonders for the overall atmosphere. It just feels right when you're listening to Jimi Hendrix and piloting a Huey. This is nothing new for EA, as it only takes one quick look at the NBA Live and FIFA franchises from EA Sports to realize that putting together great music and gameplay is a win-win situation for everyone. So if you're a style guru and like a bit of flare and hipness to go with your action games, the initial coolness factor of Battlefield: Vietnam will most certainly float your boat.
Moving past the initial impressions players will be introduced to a jazzy game interface the mechanics of which will essentially be immediately familiar to anyone who has spent a lot of time playing Battlefield 1942. To me that was a good thing. Everything looks fresh, and yet familiar; nothing wrong with that in my mind. It's like getting back with your old girlfriend that had a boob job since you two broke up.
The same thing can be said about your first contact with the game options. (Just forget the boob reference for a second. [How? - Six]) The conquest mode of play is what this game is all about. The CTF and Deathmatch modes are no more and the two new game modes are essentially variations of the conquest mode. Evolution mode spans two maps, having the player's score carried over to the second map, while the Custom Combat mode allows servers to create and run custom configurations for maps, allowing them to be able to change vehicles, weapons and more. Right off the bat, you'll notice that Battlefield: Vietnam partially innovates with a boatload of nuances, but very much retains the feel of the original.
Assault and classic conquest maps are what this game is all about. You've seen it all in BF1942, so the sequel will have very few surprises in those regards. Let's just say that in terms of game modes DICE were pretty damn conservative. This, in all honesty, is something you'd expect from an EA-owned development team.
There are approximately 14 maps in the sequel and I think I've played them all. (Do I get a medal now? Wait… you might take this the wrong way.) Again, you cannot expect any major surprises here, and some of the level design reminded me of DICE's earlier work. The Cambodian Incursion assault map bears striking resemblance conceptually to the Monte Cassino map from the Road to Rome expansion. What I liked most about the new maps are the diverse landscapes. The nature of the Vietnam conflict was such that the U.S. and South Vietnamese forces often had to use air supremacy to fight against well entrenched Vietcong soldiers. You have that, and you have maps where American soldiers will be forced to engage in melee combat in the jungle thicket. Or they'll have to capture and defend crucial hanging bridges over muddy rivers and swamp-covered rice fields. Sometimes (similar to what we've seen in "Operation Husky" in Road to Rome) assaulting army will have to cross large bodies of water to get to the well-fortified enemy. However, map design isn't too creative and a good majority of the maps will remind you of the stuff you've seen in either the original or some of the expansions.
The two main novelties that BF: Vietnam brings to the table are brought about by the very nature of the Vietnam conflict and the warring factions. As I said, the US forces had to use air supremacy and the VC had some very unorthodox ways of fighting the GI's. I'm sure that months of testing went into tweaking and balancing the gameplay to make sure that the new Vietcong features are properly incorporated into the game. Things like booby traps and the ability of NVA engineers to relocate spawn points on the map through digging and creating tunnels is certainly something that may prove very interesting in the long run. It'll take a lot of reading through forums and learning advanced tips and tricks to really get the hang of the new VC features. Eventually, once everyone catches up with the new stuff, it will be interesting to see if the players accept NVA as a genuine and attractive option in the game. As for the U.S. forces the thing that caught my attention was the excellent and very powerful F4 Phantom fighter, which damn nearly shifts much of the focus of the game and changes the dynamics of combat over what we had in 1942. The developers did mention that what tanks were in 1942, helicopters and jets will become in BF: Vietnam. The Huey and other famous choppers will make all the difference in the world, as they can serve as great assault, support or transport vehicles. By setting things up the way they did in the game DICE kind of gambled a little (no pun intended) as this slightly altered style of gameplay may backfire and eventually put off some of the fans that were really only interested in land (specifically, armored) combat in 1942.
How do you make a sequel to one of the most popular multiplayer shooters in recent history? Do you take it a step further by tacking on some innovating new concept? Then you'd have to partially reinvent the gameplay, which is not something developers are keen on doing - especially when they're on EA's payroll; and besides, setting a game in a specific historic period does carry with it certain limitations. Those of you who are following the trends in the gaming industry know that EA is acknowledged for spotting talent and then basically milking their original concepts for all they're worth. The Sims certainly comes to mind here, as well as the Medal of Honor series. In a way, this is a bulletproof business plan, and that's why they're the number one game publisher at the moment. So with the release of a new Battlefield game a question looms in the air: will it suffer the same fate as the abovementioned series?
We've already covered Battlefield: Vietnam up the wazoo, with two previews and numerous news reports. So if you're still not in the know as to what features are new in this game, what is the historical background, or anything else relating to the new features, I suggest you give these articles a read. In this review I'll try to answer several "simple" questions: does the sequel advance the franchise in any way, and is it as fun as the original game.
I don't know if you know this, but DICE, who only had BF1942 published by EA, are now owned by them. On the upside, it is very apparent right from the start that Battlefield: Vietnam has received a visual and audio makeover that screams five-star PC game production all the way. EA is keen on investing money in profitable projects. The menus look funky, but very, very professional and graphically perfected, and the musical tracks featured in the game are fully licensed and do wonders for the overall atmosphere. It just feels right when you're listening to Jimi Hendrix and piloting a Huey. This is nothing new for EA, as it only takes one quick look at the NBA Live and FIFA franchises from EA Sports to realize that putting together great music and gameplay is a win-win situation for everyone. So if you're a style guru and like a bit of flare and hipness to go with your action games, the initial coolness factor of Battlefield: Vietnam will most certainly float your boat.
Moving past the initial impressions players will be introduced to a jazzy game interface the mechanics of which will essentially be immediately familiar to anyone who has spent a lot of time playing Battlefield 1942. To me that was a good thing. Everything looks fresh, and yet familiar; nothing wrong with that in my mind. It's like getting back with your old girlfriend that had a boob job since you two broke up.
The same thing can be said about your first contact with the game options. (Just forget the boob reference for a second. [How? - Six]) The conquest mode of play is what this game is all about. The CTF and Deathmatch modes are no more and the two new game modes are essentially variations of the conquest mode. Evolution mode spans two maps, having the player's score carried over to the second map, while the Custom Combat mode allows servers to create and run custom configurations for maps, allowing them to be able to change vehicles, weapons and more. Right off the bat, you'll notice that Battlefield: Vietnam partially innovates with a boatload of nuances, but very much retains the feel of the original.
Assault and classic conquest maps are what this game is all about. You've seen it all in BF1942, so the sequel will have very few surprises in those regards. Let's just say that in terms of game modes DICE were pretty damn conservative. This, in all honesty, is something you'd expect from an EA-owned development team.
There are approximately 14 maps in the sequel and I think I've played them all. (Do I get a medal now? Wait… you might take this the wrong way.) Again, you cannot expect any major surprises here, and some of the level design reminded me of DICE's earlier work. The Cambodian Incursion assault map bears striking resemblance conceptually to the Monte Cassino map from the Road to Rome expansion. What I liked most about the new maps are the diverse landscapes. The nature of the Vietnam conflict was such that the U.S. and South Vietnamese forces often had to use air supremacy to fight against well entrenched Vietcong soldiers. You have that, and you have maps where American soldiers will be forced to engage in melee combat in the jungle thicket. Or they'll have to capture and defend crucial hanging bridges over muddy rivers and swamp-covered rice fields. Sometimes (similar to what we've seen in "Operation Husky" in Road to Rome) assaulting army will have to cross large bodies of water to get to the well-fortified enemy. However, map design isn't too creative and a good majority of the maps will remind you of the stuff you've seen in either the original or some of the expansions.
The two main novelties that BF: Vietnam brings to the table are brought about by the very nature of the Vietnam conflict and the warring factions. As I said, the US forces had to use air supremacy and the VC had some very unorthodox ways of fighting the GI's. I'm sure that months of testing went into tweaking and balancing the gameplay to make sure that the new Vietcong features are properly incorporated into the game. Things like booby traps and the ability of NVA engineers to relocate spawn points on the map through digging and creating tunnels is certainly something that may prove very interesting in the long run. It'll take a lot of reading through forums and learning advanced tips and tricks to really get the hang of the new VC features. Eventually, once everyone catches up with the new stuff, it will be interesting to see if the players accept NVA as a genuine and attractive option in the game. As for the U.S. forces the thing that caught my attention was the excellent and very powerful F4 Phantom fighter, which damn nearly shifts much of the focus of the game and changes the dynamics of combat over what we had in 1942. The developers did mention that what tanks were in 1942, helicopters and jets will become in BF: Vietnam. The Huey and other famous choppers will make all the difference in the world, as they can serve as great assault, support or transport vehicles. By setting things up the way they did in the game DICE kind of gambled a little (no pun intended) as this slightly altered style of gameplay may backfire and eventually put off some of the fans that were really only interested in land (specifically, armored) combat in 1942.
Visually, the game has definitely been tweaked, but you won't notice it right off the bat. The first thing that came to my mind when I saw the game was, "damn, it looks just like 1942!" As the initial impression wore off, I realized that this mostly had to do with the fact that the urban map I loaded up had very similar background textures to what we were used to seeing in BF: 1942. However, when you take a good look at the new surroundings you'll see that the models look a lot more detailed, courtesy of normal mapping, gun models are incredibly detailed; with animated ammo belts that sway as you run through the jungle, the jungle thicket looks lush and authentic even though it doesn't bring down the frame rate, and it's obvious from looking at metal surfaces that bump mapping and highly effective dynamic lighting has been used to enhance their appearance. Finally, the way the dirt flies up in the air when a nearby explosion goes off, and how drops of water spray in the air as the bullets hit its surface is clear evidence that the particle effects have been greatly enhanced. The visual advancements in this game are subtle, but they're certainly there and you'll become more aware of them as you keep playing. On first glance, this game will still look very similar to BF 1942 and it's apparent that the 3D engine hasn't been built from scratch.
The sound engine, on the other hand, has been rebuilt from the ground up and boy does it show! The sound effects are a whole helluva lot better. I have a 7.1 surround system hooked up to my PC, with an Audigy 2 sound card, and on a couple of occasions, correctly identifying where the gunfire was coming from saved my hide. As I had mentioned earlier on in the review, the musical soundtrack that you can play while driving jeeps, jets or helicopters is superb and it really gives you that "I'm in a Stanley Kubrick movie" feeling while you're playing. What kind of made me chuckle about it though, is that even the VC troops get to listen to Jimi while driving MiG's and other VC land vehicles. That's rather silly, don't you think?
There are a couple of important points I neglected to mention so far. The net code is good (I haven't had any major issues with it), and so is the frame rate. I've played the game for days and it only crashed on me once. The single-player mode is in many ways similar to BF1942, as the bots aren't that much smarter. But single-player never was a major part of the game anyway. Player classes remained much the same, but as I'm sure you've learned from the previews by now, each of them comes equipped with a boatload of new weapons and gadgets. It seems to me like the engineer class has received the biggest overhaul. While it's fun to be able to choose between two different weapon layouts for each of the classes, choosing head/body for your player model seems pretty much redundant as you only have a couple of options none of which look particularly appealing. That is unless you're fanatical about this game enough to scan your own images and include them in the game. Two very useful interface additions that make your life so much easier during combat are the on-screen readouts of the spawn zones and their distance in meters (you get that by pressing the 'Q' key by default), and the graphical representation of the amount of time left before the spawn zone is captured. These are, of course, subtle touches that help a lot when you're in the thick of things.
In conclusion, at first glance, Battlefield: Vietnam will seem like a beefed up BF1942 with a number of minor or moderate gameplay changes. Once you start analyzing what you've experienced, however, and once the new features start to sink in, you'll change your mind to some degree and acknowledge what DICE has done here. OK, so you could argue that most of what we've seen in the game has been featured in mods or expansions, and to a degree you will be right, but that's now a matter of what you expect this sequel to bring. Battlefield: Vietnam will provide a nice change of pace for the BF1942 fanatics, and it's certainly hella fun in multiplayer (that goes without saying), but it will also receive flak from some for not pushing the envelope even further. What I personally would've liked to have seen from DICE is even more creativity in terms of map design, game modes and player classes. Many of the maps are too reminiscent of the old stuff we've seen in the original and the expansions, and not being able to come up with a single new concept for how the game should be played kind of makes Vietnam appear even more conservative than it is. The catch here is that EA has profitable concept set up, and while they still allowed DICE to tinker with certain aspects of the gameplay mechanics (warfare), they wanted to make damn sure they weren't reinventing the wheel. I can't say I'm very enthusiastic about their logic, but it's definitely a sound business move on their part. |
