# Battlefield 1943



## Keirel (Jul 12, 2009)

Hi i play Battlefield 1943 on PS3 but it is on Xbox360 and PC as well i would recommend it to anyone. It is about $20(Australian) and is downloadable and online play only does anyone else play this? If so and you play it on PS3 i will add you to my friends list if you post your account name. Also there is a free 30 minute trial you can download for free.


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 12, 2009)

Are the Aussie servers up yet? I downloaded the 360 trial and was annoyingly impressed.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 12, 2009)

i play battlefield bad company becouse it is better.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 12, 2009)

I tried it and was very pleased. I'm going to get it on my PS3


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 12, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I tried it and was very pleased. I'm going to get it on my PS3



don't buy 1943 it is not worth it bad company is way better it has more maps, more wepons, and more game types plus bad company takes place in modern times and bad company has a single player campaign.(there are thousands ofWWII games)


----------



## Keirel (Jul 12, 2009)

Yes the Australian servers are up also Jango it only costs $20(Australian) Bad Company costs what $100?(Australian)


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 12, 2009)

Donut_Assasin said:


> Yes the Australian servers are up also Jango it only costs $20(Australian) Bad Company costs what $100?(Australian)



where i am you can go to any game store and get bad company for 20$ it has way more content in it than 1943. bad company is a better deal and a better game.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 12, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> where i am you can go to any game store and get bad company for 20$ it has way more content in it than 1942. bad company is a better deal and a better game.


http://ebgames.com.au/xbox/product.cfm?id=9193&refer=productsearch
as you can see, $60 != $20.


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 12, 2009)

Battlefield Bad-Company wasn't that good, and didn't have that much content. Battlefield 1942 was much more content, if you mean 1943 then they're on the same engine only Bad Company has more content. 1943 however will be on the PC, as will Bad-Company 2.

As you can see this thread is about 1943 though, Jango; this is your second comment on Bad-Company, a different game; if I open a thread on Wet will you bring up Mirrors Edge?


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 12, 2009)

i was talking about 1943. and wet and mirrors edge are totaly different types of games. wet is an action bullet time game like max payne and mirrors edge is a freeruning game like assasins creed so no. bad company is the better deal. i got the gold edition from gamestop for 20$ it has more content than 1943. 1943 is a reskined dumbed down version of bad company and i feel sad for all the people that get tricked into buying it.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 12, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> i was talking about 1943. and wet and mirrors edge are totaly different types of games. wet is an action bullet time game like max payne and mirrors edge is a freeruning game like assasins creed so no. bad company is the better deal. i got the gold edition from gamestop for 20$ it has more content than 1943. 1943 is a reskined dumbed down version of bad company and i feel sad for all the people that get tricked into buying it.


the game costs $20 Australian. bad company costs $60 Australian. you *know* about currency differences, right?


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> the game costs $20 Australian. bad company costs $60 Australian. you *know* about currency differences, right?



yes i do. for me in the states bad company=better deal than 1943. but regardless of price 1943 has less maps, wepons, kits, and gametypes and plus you don't get rewarded for ranking up exept a fancy new logo next to your name.


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 13, 2009)

Look, what you're saying is the exact equivalent of Battlefield 2 being better than battlefield 2142, which doesn't make sense; you're making no sense because they're just on the same engine but completely different games.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Look, what you're saying is the exact equivalent of Battlefield 2 being better than battlefield 2142, which doesn't make sense; you're making no sense because they're just on the same engine but completely different games.



and i am fed up with WWII games there are thousands of them not to mention the wepons suck(a single shot rifle realy?) the only thing i actualy liked were the planes that is the only new addition to the game. and why only three kits?


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> and i am fed up with WWII games there are thousands of them not to mention the wepons suck(a single shot rifle realy?) the only thing i actualy liked were the planes that is the only new addition to the game. and why only three kits?



"I'm fed up with xxx so I'm gonna complain about it and suggest something -different- that's offtopic." That argument is flawed. Heavily.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 13, 2009)

Thats just your opinion. Besides I don't give a damn about content. If the game is fun then I'll buy it. Its our damn money so we'll do as we please with it kthx bai. Also its an ARCADE GAME so of course it has less content than others.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> "I'm fed up with xxx so I'm gonna complain about it and suggest something -different- that's offtopic." That argument is flawed. Heavily.



you would be to if you had been playing a games in the same time period so long. and i am serious i can pull up a list of the thousands of WWII games in existance.


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> you would be to if you had been playing a games in the same time period so long. and i am serious i can pull up a list of the thousands of WWII games in existance.



Uhm I've been playing games online since Quake, you're one year older than I am (or so you say on your FA) there's no way you started before that, Wolfinstine was the first WWII game I played, Medal of Honor: Underground was good at the time too, and I also went along to MOHAA as my first WWII online game (plus the two expansions) and COD (plus its expansion), BF1942 (and the two expansions), and many many more before and after. Experience doesn't allow you to be an asshole, flaunting around that xxx game you own is better. This topic is about 1943, and 1942 was awesome; it's much much better on the Frostbite engine.

Sure, you like Bad-Company better, but don't flaunt that in a thread about another game that's only made by the same company. Bethesda is making Wet, they also made Fallout 3 and Oblivion; do those games deserve a comparison? Different games all-together. Just because it's the same engine and an FPS doesn't mean it's comparable, it's a different game with a completely different play style. 

For god sakes you have unlimited ammo in 1943, it's a casual based game. I'd also love to see Bad-Company bring the frostbite engine to the PC, which 1943 currently is doing. Bad-Company two will blow Bad-Company out of the water, now that's two games you can compare against; why blow $50 on Bad-Company when you can save $30 and get 1943, then get Bad-Company 2 once it's out.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

i got gold edition bad company for 20$ and i have played 1943 it is a reskined version of bad company.(even the animations are the same) and you wouldn't have that nice frostbite engine if it were not for bad company. and BC2 is going to inovate with the series by giving you more kit costomization options and in bad company 2 you can blowup whole buildings. BC2 will be way better than both BC and 1943.


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 13, 2009)

How are the animations the same? They're completely different vehicles and weapons; the only similar animation is running, oh no they made running realistic so they must change that to be unrealistic because it's similar. Again, BF2 and BF2142 were more alike than BF: Bad-Company and BF2943, quit whining.

And in BC2 you can't blow up whole buildings, it's the same engine.


----------



## Wreth (Jul 13, 2009)

This game is full of noobs. I come in the top 3 players of nearly every battle and win nearly every battle. I didn't even think i was that good at FPS's


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 13, 2009)

Zoopedia said:


> This game is full of noobs. I come in the top 3 players of nearly every battle and win nearly every battle. I didn't even think i was that good at FPS's


Because it's not JUMPJUMPJUMPNADESPAMNADESPAM like most other console FPS's.


----------



## Carenath (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> and i am fed up with WWII games there are thousands of them not to mention the wepons suck(a single shot rifle realy?) the only thing i actualy liked were the planes that is the only new addition to the game. and why only three kits?


So, you dont like WWII games, then dont buy them.



Jango The Blue Fox said:


> you would be to if you had been playing a games in the same time period so long. and i am serious i can pull up a list of the thousands of WWII games in existance.


I can list the thousands of first-person-shooters which all follow the same mundane theme, add little variation, and still see people raving over them.
I dont generally like first-person-shooters, but I dont rant about them, I just dont buy the games.

Point is, this thread is about the OP's recommendation of a game he likes, BF 1943, not about your dislike of WWII-theme games.

Please keep the thread on topic, thanks.


----------



## Keirel (Jul 13, 2009)

Thank you Carenath now can we just talk about the game?


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> And in BC2 you can't blow up whole buildings, it's the same engine.



DICE  confirmed full destruction of buildings in BC2. BC2 is runing on an updated frostbite engine. and the vehicals are exactly the same exept for planes(jeeps tanks boats) they are reskined versions of all the vehicals in bad company. and the only animations that are not the same as BC are the animations specific to all the WWII wepons in the game.


----------



## Bambi (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango, I'll agree with you on one thing.

Buildings can be brought down (most of them, excluding concrete bunkers and a few other exceptional structures.) As for the rest? I have no idea what the hell happened in this thread, but I do know one thing: The quality assurance lead for Battlefield 1943 should've protested each one of the XBox Live! marketplace release dates, and made it apparent to the developing team that their product was waaayyyy behind schedule.

Games great, but it freezes constantly, several launch-date issues that still haven't been fixed, etc.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

and most hardcore battlefield fans like me will tell you that bad company is a better deal and better game than 1943. (they are both the same price and BC has more content than 1943)


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> and most hardcore battlefield fans like me will tell you that bad company is a better deal and better game than 1943. (they are both the same price and BC has more content than 1943)


They are NOT the same price.
1943 is $20au, Bad Company is $60au
1200MS points is about $15us, which is STILL less than the $20us you claim for Bad Company.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> They are NOT the same price.
> 1943 is $20au, Bad Company is $60au
> 1200MS points is about $15us, which is STILL less than the $20us you claim for Bad Company.



at the gamestop stores by my house (thats 5 game stops) the price of BC is 20$ or less. 1943 is 15$ but in order to get enough point to buy it you have to buy a 20$ xbox points card BC is the better choice.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> at the gamestop stores by my house (thats 5 game stops) the price of BC is 20$ or less. 1943 is 15$ but in order to get enough point to buy it you have to buy a 20$ xbox points card BC is the better choice.


or you can buy your points in actual increments via xbox live :3 let's analyse the options for a potential purchase, here; you can buy Bad Company, and as a new player you'll be entirely alienated by the population of people who have been playing since day 0. Or you can buy 1943; which is a casual game designed for pick up and play and you'll have a really great time regardless of your skill level.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

yes but then someone will tell you about BC and then BC2  and you will realize you got ripped off. and casual people don't play the 360 they play the wii.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> yes but then someone will tell you about BC and then BC2  and you will realize you got ripped off. and casual people don't play the 360 they play the wii.


I consider myself casual and I play more 360 than Wii. Mainly because I'm a graphics whore, and I know there any many out there like me. Remember Casual != "Non Gamer". Know the difference; it could save your life!


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> I consider myself casual and I play more 360 than Wii. Mainly because I'm a graphics whore, and I know there any many out there like me. Remember Casual != "Non Gamer". Know the difference; it could save your life!



ok you claim to be casual. what games do you play and how frequently?


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> ok you claim to be casual. what games do you play and how frequently?


Rock Band 2, Guitar Hero Metallica, Castle Crashers, Disney Sing, Singstar, blah blah blah. And only a few hours a week, mostly when I have friends over and we've got nothing else planned.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Rock Band 2, Guitar Hero Metallica, Castle Crashers, Disney Sing, Singstar, blah blah blah. And only a few hours a week, mostly when I have friends over and we've got nothing else planned.



ok your a casual gamer why buy 1943?


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> ok your a casual gamer why buy 1943?


because it's a pick up and play game that doesn't severely penalize you for being a new player or a casual player who might only play once or twice a week for 20 minutes. it discourages "elitism" in gaming and rewards players for just jumping in and playing.


----------



## Carenath (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> I consider myself casual and I play more 360 than Wii. Mainly because I'm a graphics whore, and I know there any many out there like me. Remember Casual != "Non Gamer". Know the difference; it could save your life!


Im a casual gamer and a graphics whore, I bought a PS3. Honestly, I probably would pick up a copy of 1943 for the fun element, most of the people that play FPS games religiously tend to enjoy using players like me for target practise


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 13, 2009)

Carenath said:


> Im a casual gamer and a graphics whore, I bought a PS3. Honestly, I probably would pick up a copy of 1943 for the fun element, most of the people that play FPS games religiously tend to enjoy using players like me for target practise



Aww Carenath I'll be gentle. I promise. Also Jango just shut the hell up for christ sake you are fighting a losing battle in this thread no one cares if you dislike 1943. You expressed your opinion and no one is caring to listen so now end this useless battle


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> because it's a pick up and play game that doesn't severely penalize you for being a new player or a casual player who might only play once or twice a week for 20 minutes. it discourages "elitism" in gaming and rewards players for just jumping in and playing.



ok its a game you can jump in and play but how does it reward you for just jumping in and playing? last i saw you don't get rewarded for doing anything exept for achivements.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

the reward is in playing the game and having fun? to expect more than that from a game is a little unrealistic, isn't it?


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

and those same people that play other WWII games religously like call of duty are going to play this religously to. if you are casual you are going to walk 5 feet after spawning and get killed by a sniper or camper and then get pissed off.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 13, 2009)

Well, actually; like you pointed out ~ any serious gamer will buy Bad Company. There's no long term reward to 1943; it's pick up and play and that discourages the "hardcore" gamers. It's casual, and it's better for it.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 13, 2009)

Sassy said:


> Well, actually; like you pointed out ~ any serious gamer will buy Bad Company. There's no long term reward to 1943; it's pick up and play and that discourages the "hardcore" gamers. It's casual, and it's better for it.



realy? ask around the 1943 forums ask them how many casual gamers they know that play 1943.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 14, 2009)

Carenath can we please close this thread its getting out of hand


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> at the gamestop stores by my house (thats 5 game stops) the price of BC is 20$ or less. 1943 is 15$ but in order to get enough point to buy it you have to buy a 20$ xbox points card BC is the better choice.


Then with the left over MS points I can get Worms 2 Armageddon, the new Skate 2 DLC or some Rock Band tracks.
BF:BC is generally around $50AUD+ retail unless you buy/trade with someone personally.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

do i have to go to a gamestop and take a picture of the game with my phone to prove to you that BC is 20$?


----------



## I am a communist (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> do i have to go to a gamestop and take a picture of the game with my phone to prove to you that BC is 20$?


Yes, if it'll get you away from this thread for 5 god damn minutes. Jesus fuck why don't you 'sperg out more?

Anyways, I played the demo and it said that I couldn't connect to the EA servers or something, which is disappointing since the BF series always looked fun. Does anyone know a way to fix this?


----------



## Sassy (Jul 14, 2009)

Bokracroc said:


> Then with the left over MS points I can get Worms 2 Armageddon, the new Skate 2 DLC or some Rock Band tracks.
> BF:BC is generally around $50AUD+ retail unless you buy/trade with someone personally.


*$50AU. *



Jango The Blue Fox said:


> do i have to go to a gamestop and take a picture of the game with my phone to prove to you that BC is 20$?


*Not $50US.*
Please, pleeeaaasse read before you post.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

they have been haveing server problems since the game came out. just wait a while and then try again later. they have like 5 million+ people trying to connect to games at the same time.


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> do i have to go to a gamestop and take a picture of the game with my phone to prove to you that BC is 20$?


http://www.ebgames.com.au/productSearch.cfm?sort=sd&platform=&title=Battlefield:+Bad+Company


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Bokracroc said:


> http://www.ebgames.com.au/productSearch.cfm?sort=sd&platform=&title=Battlefield:+Bad+Company



i understand the game is 50$ over there i am saying in the U.S. BC is a better deal becouse you can get it for 20$ in the U.S. and if you want a casual battltfield game go download battlefield heroes it is free and it will run on any computer.


----------



## Sassy (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> i understand the game is 50$ over there i am saying in the U.S. BC is a better deal becouse you can get it for 20$ in the U.S. and if you want a casual battltfield game go download battlefield heroes it is free and it will run on any computer.


What about for consoles? 1943 is still a perfect choice.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 14, 2009)

Guys just quit feeding him. He won't listen to reason


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Sassy said:


> What about for consoles? 1943 is still a perfect choice.



the whole reasion they made heroes was for casual gamers its free it can run on any computer and it has that same cartoony pixar art style that casual gamers like. and 1943 is not casual. do you think that the millions of people that stayed up till midnight to get 1943 and than crashed the servers are casual gamers?


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> DICE  confirmed full destruction of buildings in BC2. BC2 is runing on an updated frostbite engine. and the vehicals are exactly the same exept for planes(jeeps tanks boats) they are reskined versions of all the vehicals in bad company. and the only animations that are not the same as BC are the animations specific to all the WWII wepons in the game.



Uh, no they haven't. There wasn't "limitations" on the engine that made buildings in BC not fully destructible, the reason was because they wanted tactics still; they didn't want the while map to be a flat sniper-fest.

DICE never confirmed -anything- about BC2 other than it coming out.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> and most hardcore battlefield fans like me will tell you that bad company is a better deal and better game than 1943. (they are both the same price and BC has more content than 1943)


You've been told by a mod already to stay on-topic, but you're disregarding it and still spurting garbage that isn't even true.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> at the gamestop stores by my house (thats 5 game stops) the price of BC is 20$ or less. 1943 is 15$ but in order to get enough point to buy it you have to buy a 20$ xbox points card BC is the better choice.


Same as above, also we don't count "near me" seeing as retail it's still full price, you're talking about second-hand or special deals that include those in *YOUR* immediate area alone, *NOT* anybody else.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> yes but then someone will tell you about BC and then BC2  and you will realize you got ripped off. and casual people don't play the 360 they play the wii.


Wait, why does this matter? Casual people play what-ever they want. There's no laws or rules saying they must play the Wii.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> ok you claim to be casual. what games do you play and how frequently?


Now you're making the thread about one user, for fuck sakes grow the hell up. This "it's better lolololol" attitude doesn't work well on somebody your age.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> ok your a casual gamer why buy 1943?


It was made with casual gaming in mind; unlimited ammo for one.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> ok its a game you can jump in and play but how does it reward you for just jumping in and playing? last i saw you don't get rewarded for doing anything exept for achivements.


The only reason you play games is for a reward other than enjoyment? Sad.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> and those same people that play other WWII games religously like call of duty are going to play this religously to. if you are casual you are going to walk 5 feet after spawning and get killed by a sniper or camper and then get pissed off.


This doesn't even make sense in the slightest, at all... in fact this makes me facepalm.


Jango The Blue Fox said:


> do i have to go to a gamestop and take a picture of the game with my phone to prove to you that BC is 20$?


Prove it's not second-hand/used too.

Ugh, this guy is pretty dense.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

i did not get the game during any special deals i got the gold edition new sealed in the box for 20$. and i will say this again 1943 is not a casual game it was made with all those fans of 1942 that wanted a newer version of the game in mind. and unlimited ammo does not make a game casual. and yes DICE  already confirmed a lot of stuff about BC2 like fully destructable buildings, regenerating health, assult kit now holds a pistol and rifle, and aiming with the iron sites on SMGs.


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 14, 2009)

-Anything- can make a game casual. Any crutch at all, unlimited ammo is one. There's no set rules for casual games.

If you're going to wave around -anything- about BC2 like it's fact I'm going to simply ask you to prove it, so get at it.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> -Anything- can make a game casual. Any crutch at all, unlimited ammo is one. There's no set rules for casual games.
> 
> If you're going to wave around -anything- about BC2 like it's fact I'm going to simply ask you to prove it, so get at it.



go watch gameplay of BC2 on youtube or gametrailers.com every thing i just said about the game is true. they also have two man ATVs in the game.


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> go watch gameplay of BC2 on youtube or gametrailers.com every thing i just said about the game is true. they also have two man ATVs in the game.



So you're bullshitting then, I assume so due to your lack of proof. Oh, ok makes sense.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> So you're bullshitting then, I assume so due to your lack of proof. Oh, ok makes sense.



i can't copy/paste links on my psp. there is gameplay of BC2 from the E3 show floor on youtube and gametrailers.com. just go to one of those sites and search for battlefield bad company 2 gameplay


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> i can't copy/paste links on my psp. there is gameplay of BC2 from the E3 show floor on youtube and gametrailers.com. just go to one of those sites and search for battlefield bad company 2 gameplay



I've watched them all, they haven't said anything. They show a quad, but that doesn't even mean you can drive one, though I know you can; BF: Modern Combat had quads, it's not new; other than the Quad remark you mentioned -after- everything else you've said about BC2 isn't true.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I've watched them all, they haven't said anything. They show a quad, but that doesn't even mean you can drive one, though I know you can; BF: Modern Combat had quads, it's not new; other than the Quad remark you mentioned -after- everything else you've said about BC2 isn't true.



since you obviously can't search the internet yourself i will try to hand type a link for you. 
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/985/985866p1.html


----------



## lilEmber (Jul 14, 2009)

Three things wrong with that link:
It doesn't show fully destructible buildings like you said, meaning it's not a source that agrees with you.
It's a high-resolution CGI render, not in-game footage.
And finally it's not even youtube or gametrailers like you said to look, why would you choose that link instead of GT? Though I seen this back in like February when it was first launched on GT.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Three things wrong with that link:
> It doesn't show fully destructible buildings like you said, meaning it's not a source that agrees with you.
> It's a high-resolution CGI render, not in-game footage.
> And finally it's not even youtube or gametrailers like you said to look, why would you choose that link instead of GT? Though I seen this back in like February when it was first launched on GT.



actualy that whole trailer was gameplay


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

and at the end of that trailer you can clearly see the whole building go down. and it is a gaming news site its their job to report on this stuff plus when i was talking about youtube and gametrailers.com i was refering to all the videos of people on the show room floor playing the game. that page is a hands on preview of the MP i sent that like for you to read it not to watch the trailer.


----------



## Wreth (Jul 14, 2009)

Ugh, Jango, you don't like 1943, we get it. We also don't care and want to discuss the game itself not try and convince you to like it.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Zoopedia said:


> Ugh, Jango, you don't like 1943, we get it. We also don't care and want to discuss the game itself not try and convince you to like it.



what is there to talk about? its a WWII game, you shoot people, you blow stuff up, you fly planes.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Three things wrong with that link:
> It doesn't show fully destructible buildings like you said, meaning it's not a source that agrees with you.
> It's a high-resolution CGI render, not in-game footage.
> And finally it's not even youtube or gametrailers like you said to look, why would you choose that link instead of GT? Though I seen this back in like February when it was first launched on GT.



and by the way did you watch the E3 demo on that site?


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> and by the way did you watch the *E3 demo *on that site?


Because video's from E3 always are right.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jul 14, 2009)

is it me or is Jango just plain retarded?
and his posts are all the same

"I hate the game because..."
"Oh well, I don't like the game because..."
"The game sucks because..."

sheesh, just get out of threads which are talking about games/whatever you don't like


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 14, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> is it me or is Jango just plain retarded?
> and his posts are all the same
> 
> "I hate the game because..."
> ...


BF:BC IS DA SMAE PRIEC AS 1943 LOLOL./


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> is it me or is Jango just plain retarded?
> and his posts are all the same
> 
> "I hate the game because..."
> ...



i don't hate 1943 it is a good game but BC is better and if you can get BC for the same price why get 1943?


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Bokracroc said:


> Because video's from E3 always are right.



and the guy from DICE in that E3 video demo confirmed that BC2 has fully dustructable buildings. and it seem all the rest of you are the ones being retarded.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> i don't hate 1943 it is a good game but BC is better and if you can get BC for the same price why get 1943?





> and his posts are all the same


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


>



all your posts are the same to all you keep saying is that all my posts are the same. oh the irony.


----------



## Bokracroc (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> i don't hate 1943 it is a good game but BC is better and if you can get BC for the same price why get 1943?


Because.
It's not.
The same.
Price.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> all your posts are the same to all you keep saying is that all my posts are the same. oh the irony.



awww, isn't he cute

seriously, you didn't have anything better than a simple "NO U"? :3


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> awww, isn't he cute
> 
> seriously, you didn't have anything better than a simple "NO U"? :3



your the one who started throwing around the "no u" comments.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> your the one who started throwing around the "no u" comments.



Jango just shut the FUCK up we got the point 2-3 fucking pages ago


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Bokracroc said:


> Because.
> It's not.
> The same.
> Price.



in AMERICA AND CANADA it is the same price try to make a counter argument insted of trying to be a retarded asshole.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> your the one who started throwing around the "no u" comments.



no?


----------



## Sassy (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> in AMERICA AND CANADA it is the same price try to make a counter argument insted of trying to be a retarded asshole.


In American and Canada 1943 is still cheaper.
Some basic math for you
$15 is not equal to $20.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Carenath can we please close this thread its getting out of hand



i agree with this comment. this thread is getting out of hand becouse people can't sit down and have a friendly argument. this thread needs a lock.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> i agree with this comment. this thread is getting out of hand becouse people can't sit down and have a friendly argument. this thread needs a lock.



oh yeah, I wonder who's fault it was....


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> oh yeah, I wonder who's fault it was....



yours and that other guy for starting the flame war.


----------



## Kuekuatsheu (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango The Blue Fox said:


> yours and that other guy for starting the flame war.


you're even more retarded than I thought

I bet everyone here would agree


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 14, 2009)

Kuekuatsheu said:


> you're even more retarded than I thought
> 
> I bet everyone here would agree



I would. He went way off topic


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I would. He went way off topic



its not like everyone else didn't go way of topic to. all anyone in this thread wants to talk about is how stupid they think i am. mods please lock this topic.


----------



## YinYangDragon (Jul 14, 2009)

BF:BC was a horrible game to me. the story sucked the gameplay was horribad and as soon as i get around to downloading 1943 im sure i will like it. 

Does 1943 get back to hotswapping? or is it just a multiplayer game. doesnt matter either way lol


----------



## Adrianfolf (Jul 14, 2009)

Its just multiplayer


----------



## Keirel (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango we get the point you can get both game's for the same price and BC is better go state your opinion elsewhere and stop fanning the flame's.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

YinYangDragon said:


> BF:BC was a horrible game to me. the story sucked the gameplay was horribad and as soon as i get around to downloading 1943 im sure i will like it.
> 
> Does 1943 get back to hotswapping? or is it just a multiplayer game. doesnt matter either way lol



ok first the story was the best part of BC and the new gameplay features in BC they put in 1943 so by saying the gameplay of bad company sucks you are saying the gameplay of 1943 sucks to.


----------



## Wreth (Jul 14, 2009)

I far far prefer 1943  over bad company, and I own both.


----------



## Keirel (Jul 14, 2009)

Jango if you like BF:BC go make a thread on that just stop trolling.


----------



## YinYangDragon (Jul 14, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Its just multiplayer



even better and Jango name a game thats battlefield that didnt suck as hard as BC since it is insanely cheap...and most sucky games are cheap


----------



## Keirel (Jul 14, 2009)

YinYangDragon you're only making it worse.


----------



## Jango The Blue Fox (Jul 14, 2009)

YinYangDragon said:


> even better and Jango name a game thats battlefield that didnt suck as hard as BC since it is insanely cheap...and most sucky games are cheap



all the battlefield games were good exept battlefield vietnam and battlefield heroes.


----------



## Carenath (Jul 14, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Carenath can we please close this thread its getting out of hand


Yes.

Derailed.
Closed...


----------

