@KahnArtizt: Nobody still plays Halo 1. Heaps of people still play Goldeneye. Goldeneye was (alongside the Turok series) the first good console FPS but you're right, it was perfected later on.
That game was Perfect Dark. More variety, features and replay value than Halo ever had.
Hürtgen forest one of the biggest clashes of WW2? Please. It doesn't even make the top 50. And if they really think the last great WW2 film was Saving Private Ryan, and also believe that it was accurate in any way after the first 20 mins, then they're clearly shaping up to make the same old garbage that made WW2 games so long in the tooth to begin with. Morally grey characters on both sides is a step in the right direction, but it's not enough. Not even close to enough.
Sounds a bit like this could be DICE's sneaky remake of Codename Eagle in disguise... and that can only be a good thing. Especially if they bring back the No Man's Land map!
@xDaishi: Your lack of insight is just staggering. Truly staggering. You think nobody in WW1 designed a tank that could fire forward? lol. You think dogfighting was bad in WW1? LOL. The massed dogfights of WW1 were bigger and more spectacular than anything your dull fire-and-forget jets have EVER done. WW2 aside, the Great War was actually probably history's best and most cinematic aerial combat. You think every WW1 game has done poorly? Back to school, mate. And while you there maybe learn why nobody bothers with Korea (hint, it's a boring stalemate fought for no gain or decent purpose). Finally, to hell with your American focus. Half the reason everyone is so excited about WW1 as a fresh game coming out is that you lot were barely even around for the end of it. Finally some OTHER nations might get a bit of focus for once. Bring it on, I say.
Look, I get that this is an opinion piece, but you honestly lost me the moment you called Goldeneye 'clumsy'.
Literally everything you praised about bf2 outside of squads and the commander mode had been done before and on a bigger scale in Battlefield 1942. Want to know what the Battlefield series -including bf2- had lost? For a start- naval warfare. BF1942 had destroyers, battleships, aircraft carriers, even submarines, and ALL of them could be captained. Everything in the game had to be manually aimed, which brought it back to skill. Dogfighting in particular was never better than in '42, because you couldn't let a missile do your job for you. Maps were both huge and significant. When you're holed up in Stalingrad fighting off the Germans, you feel like you're fighting a battle that MATTERED. Bf2's skirmishes would barely even make the newspapers outside the US if they really happened.
Finally, the vehicle to vehicle and vehicle to infantry balance was perfect in '42. in BF2 it's a mess. A vehicle could brush by without insta-killing you in '42 as well. MUCH better for smooth gameplay.
brok's comments