Multiplayer=not what we hoped for!

[boss___hogg]

This article over a eurogamer gives us some rather worrying news about BIA multiplayer.

Eurogamer article (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=57043)

------------------------
"Eurogamer: Tell us about the multiplayer facet of BIA.

Stephen Palmer: Multiplayer is pretty unique - we're doing something a little different. We didn't want to just throw in a standard multiplayer game of Deathmatch, so we've taken the best parts of single-player, which we think are the squad combat and the squad tactics and we've amended the multiplayer so you can play with up to four players, and each player is commanding one or two squads of AI characters, depending on how many of you there are; if there's four of you you'll get one squad, if there's two of you you'll get two squads. The idea is it's also mission-based so there's a number of multiplayer missions and they all have unique objectives and you'll use your squad to solve those.

Eurogamer: Is that the only multiplayer mode you get?

Stephen Palmer: Yes that's the extent of it, but as I said each mission is unique, with different objectives."
------------------------

Sounds a bit **** to me! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

[boss___hogg]

This article over a eurogamer gives us some rather worrying news about BIA multiplayer.

Eurogamer article (http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=57043)

------------------------
"Eurogamer: Tell us about the multiplayer facet of BIA.

Stephen Palmer: Multiplayer is pretty unique - we're doing something a little different. We didn't want to just throw in a standard multiplayer game of Deathmatch, so we've taken the best parts of single-player, which we think are the squad combat and the squad tactics and we've amended the multiplayer so you can play with up to four players, and each player is commanding one or two squads of AI characters, depending on how many of you there are; if there's four of you you'll get one squad, if there's two of you you'll get two squads. The idea is it's also mission-based so there's a number of multiplayer missions and they all have unique objectives and you'll use your squad to solve those.

Eurogamer: Is that the only multiplayer mode you get?

Stephen Palmer: Yes that's the extent of it, but as I said each mission is unique, with different objectives."
------------------------

Sounds a bit **** to me! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

[Capt.Miles]

I don't know what you are talking about....This game sounds great,besides that do you really want to be on a map with 24 other people acting like teenagers ,we already have that with call of duty.
This is a very different game so the multiplayer portion has to be different and i know it will be a better ww2 experience than anything we have seen in the past.So give it a chance before you get so negative.
Capt.Miles <505>Pir easy company commander

[njcl]

theres an awful lot of negativity on this forum concerning the game,i wouldnt mind complaints but the game isnt out yet but its being judged as though it is,i think their mp is unique and as said makes bumping into children/spoilsports less likely...

[boss___hogg]

I'm not against this new MP style. What's the harm if having the option? I just think it won't be as popular if that is the only MP style in the game.

[Rifleman907]

What is really making me mad about all this hype about the MP of BiA is that everyone is saying it's going to suck because it's trying something new....it will be a great change from the normal MP because this will incorperate TEAMWORK, finally! You won't have to worry about single guys going on missions that won't help your team as much, so just shut the hell up about the MP and wait til it comes out and give it a shot and then cry about it....****....

[boss___hogg]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> everyone is saying it's going to suck because it's trying something new <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, I said I'm not against it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> so just shut the hell up about the MP and wait til it comes out and give it a shot and then cry about it <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gee, a real friendly bunch here! I suggest you relax a little and re-read my post.

[Johnpreet]

I think this mp will be really fun. I really look forword to the team play. I always wanted a mp game with team play with coving fire and communication. I know that this will be really fun. I can't wait. Your one other team play, you can talk to him easily and say "you take the right flank, Ill move in straight!" It will just be more organised.

One thing that I would change. Is to have more squads so you can have bigger wars. Oh well still can't wait.

[JS11111]

If this is the only multi player offered then this game is not going to do as well as thought. First, everyone wants to play as an individual on the battlefield. If this was not the case then the games like COD,DOD,BF1942 would never have made it. So for you guys saying that controlling a squad etc is better you are wrong. The game will do alright but without the capability of online play like the games mentioned then it will not live up to its full potential. The community is saying something quite obvious. They want online multiplayer capability like the rest of the gaming community. How can anyone defend a multi-player option of 4 vs 4 if that is what I read correctly. This does not allow you to have clans or for a large online community. I think the idea is great for single players etc. It is getting very evident that this game is probably not going to be what everyone thinks its going to be. The company obviously is going towards the XBOX route for pure profit and that is why they are only offering this kind of multiplayer option. Do not think the xbox can handle a multiplayer crowd too large. I hope I am wrong because then I will just wait until the Resistance and Liberation mod comes out for the HL2 engine. Hope the developers realize what everyone keeps saying. There are always going to be people on forums that are defenders of everything. They will defend everything the dev. say or do. They are called followers. It is obvious that I have been following the game myself since I am posting here. I will give my opinion that many more people want the game to have the multi-player capability stated above than a new 4 vs 4 situation. This style does not AGAIN allow for a large online community. But once again this system would be geared towards the XBOX crowd then. Anyone who knows comps will know what I am saying. Of course I will buy the game for the PC when it comes out. However, I know many people waiting to see if it has a normal online play. They will then buy the game. That is my two cents so you defenders can blast away now.

[witchknot9]

Ouch only one game type?
The game type sounds fun and good, but i see it now i won't play that map becuase i hate the mission but love the map so i miss out on playing on a good map becuase of bad mission! It's just like AA some maps i refuse to play on becuase i hate the missions! Also i can see it i don't want to be German on this map becuase i can't stand the mission they have, hope someone on US team well switch & so on and just like AA none wants too switch to that team ether!

I'm not saying the game type is bad in fact i love the idea but the only one!? Heck when it all comes down to it all i wanted was CooP anyways, but we all know thats out. All i can say is the mission better be great or i see myself getting bored with only playing one or three maps with good mission.

There is one thing you can do if its your room, is just let everone know not too do the mission on the map and just play it as a TDM or something if the mission on a map really ain't that good or just bored of. So i bet you can cheat alittle if everyone in the room agrees to play it that way.

[DanielMac]

Lol, you guys that are complaining about the mp are *******es. Did it ever come across your mind that just maybe there would come a mod where you could expand the number of players in mp. So you could have like 6 vs 6 with a massive amount of bots. I mean come on give the game a chance. Give the game time and then complain and ***** about it after its out. Jesus christ.

[Colin_Campbell]

I personally think it is both refreshing and scary to see a developer willing to leave all human gametypes out of the game because they want to innovate, and feel that adding those gametypes would take away from the innovation. One part of me wants to say "omgwtfbbq, no 16 player gametypes!?!?!" and the other just trusts Gearbox, that they will make the right decisions and add the gametypes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[rabs1]

I reall do hope the Devs read this. Having a squad based mp is all fine just aslong you add the normal gametypes i.e Search and destroy, Capture the documents because if these kind of gametypes arnt included you will lose so many sales believe me. The MP commuinity is so much bigger than the SP and now in todays Online gaming, these gametypes where its at and thousands of ppl will be disapointed if these gametypes arnt included.

Also kinda irrelavent but if these gametypes come out BIA will destroy CoD at major events such as CPL.

[F3-Shifty]

hey boss hogg are you from quake 2???

[boss___hogg]

Sorry Shifty, not me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[ca_ammok]

I agree with JS11111. If you want to sell the game and earn a lot of money you have to have MP. Why is Counter-Strike, Medal Of Honor, Call Of Duty and BattleField 1942 so famous? Because they have MultiPlayer gametype! They have millions of online players around the world and of course a lot of clans too. SinglePlayer is very important but after a few weeks playing it we don't want to repeat the same things.. so we go to the MP to have some fun with our friends. The MP is the "long-duration batteries" of any game. Thats the reason why Counter-Strike is still one of the top ten most played games.
You only have to check to www.clanbase.com (http://www.clanbase.com) and look the popularity of the MP. We dont want to play alone anymore. That sucks!
I love the BIA game only for the videos and screenshots. And i will buy it. But i'm sure all my friends will not buy it if he is not Fun on MP.
Please listen our requests. We are who make the games alive!!

-=]S.A.M.[=- Ammok
Special Assault Marines - ClanLeader
[ #sam @ irc.ptnet.org ]

[Deadpreacher]

I well end up still buying this game. Play single player out and try too move into MP, But i know with one game type and just mission game type i well end up on just playing one ot two maps and just get bored and be back playing old games i am playing now if not HL2.

I have alot of hope for this game but with this the only game type i see it going really no where! The game type is a good idea and is ok to play but not for long term. I played afew games with this same style (AA,ST) and they bored me within a week of playing just one or two maps becuase the other maps aint that good with the missions! At least have random mission on each map at least so people like me well play ever map! For real now why won't they just add in diffrent game types it's easy to do it & it well keep the replay value higher maken it a great game. For me and all the people i play with heard about this and got turned off from even thinking of buying the game becuase they all thought back too AA and had second thoughts.

I am not tring too trash the game or the game type its a good game type. Im just worried that only one game type well not go far or last long.

[DaveTinNY]

I've always loved the single player games beacause you DO have to work as a team. You try to rambo and you die.
I think the BIA MP format will be interesting as long as the others you play with are real people online; the trick will be to get everyone to work as a *team.*
Every once in a while I'll stumble on a good COD MP Deathmatch game online and it's a pleasure to work with A: adults and B: people working together to eliminate enemy pockets yard by yard... not just Rambo-ing around with blazing automatic weapons. The only weapon I ever use is the Garand rifle, no scope, no crosshairs, and I do pretty well with it. :-)

[Bazooka_Boy]

for my 2 cents. I want the type of teamwork the preposed mp mode suggests. But with the ability to have all players as humans rather than ai. Same control method would be fine. My clan currently plays Joint Ops and has no problems taken orders and working as a unit. I'ev played Full Spectrum and the concept was good but it gets a little tired after a few missions. The holy grail for me would be a mode with 10 to 16 humans per side but at a pace of real wars, no rambos, something that forces the commander to stop and think about his moves. Like Operaton Flashpoint without the bugs and set in a realistic wwii environment.

[JS11111]

Well thank you to the guy who is obviously not the ******* as the other suggested. Of course the community wants mp and that is what i was saying etc. However maybe they never designed the game for it and maybe it can not handle MP. Who knows.. All I know is that most of the community wants a MP mode. That should say enough to the guy who said we were *******'s. Please do not be a yes man your whole life. I hope the game does rock but without MP capability then it will not get the mass appeal like COD and the others.

[njcl]

lol.......all your comments/whining makes me laugh........i wont be buying BIA simply because im british and playing as an american is not immersive for me but i think the game will be good and whatever mp they choose i hope the sp is better than the moronic cod/moh...

[Dannard]

I think that the MP will be a nice change. It's kinda like playing Co-op and since I can't get broadband in my area I'm looking forward to playing it over a LAN http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
I suppose that the DEV's are too worried about people being upset about the lack of multiplayer game types. I say this because people are saying "I'll buy the game...but" DEV's just want you to buy the game, so theyll be happy anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif
I'm pretty sure that after the games initial release, they'll make a patch with TDM annd other game types, just like SOLDIERS: Heroes of World War II.

PS. DanielMAc... there's no need to call people *******es just because they have a different opinion.

[Cpt.Stukan]

No, its not a big problem, its cool as it is..

[Cpt.Stukan]

When is the game released?

[Cpt.Stukan]

GUYS!Shape up, now it will be teamwork, no more kiddies teamkillin' ya or run somewhere and stay there forever, c,mon i think this game will be pretty cool, and i cant wait to buy the PC version of it ... and play alot of mp , mostly L.A.N now when i read http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gifabout the AI soldiers. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

[Sgt.Ekdahl]

But its no big deal if there is a squad based gameplay or individual runing crazy as in games such as COD or BF 1942, those games are good but the squad based game play in a multi player game sounds great. and if there are winers out there dont judge it its not even out.

[Fyredawg]

How exactly is expressing your opinion whinning? Yall kill me.

You know I posted on this very subject back almost 5 months ago on Gearbox's forums (the ones before these)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Here is my view or hopes. I WANT to see and play BIA's multiplayer as it has been described with the humans and the AI combined. I think its an idea at the very least worth trying and looking at with an open mind. I honestly think most of the folks here feel the same as I do on the subject.

On the same hand I want to see some traditional MP wether it be Adverserial teams or Objective based. AA has great objective based adverserial team play. I have grown to like that style more than anything. As a ladder admin, I look forward to a WWII era game that has some realism. I am sorry DoD, RTCW, MOHAA, CoD are horrible and nothing like the "tactical based shooters" I have grown to love.

As for the comments about no way a game that is run with no AI get any level of teamwork, simply put you have been living a sheltered life. I promise you there are squads/team/clans out there playing games that are just simply scary. My clan climbed atop the Rumbles Ghost Recond ladder and stayed there. Not because we had a whole squad of uber leet players, but we had a well organized well practiced TEAM all of our movments was coordinated and covered. We took our sectors and covered, cleared and advanced through them. Once we took the top we could count our losses on one hand in almost a years time and still have a few fingers left. Again it wasnt based on great players, and yeah we had some, but it was a teamwork issue. Tactical games, like GR like the R6 series, like AA require teamwork even more so in the competitive arena. I promise you one good player will not win an AA match. Esp if he is playing a bunch of good teamplayers.

We routinely played GR 6 to 8 guys against 27 others. And won all the time.

My clans moto has allways been TEAMWORK KILLS

So I promise you, its out there and in groups both serious and just groups of friends its alive and well. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No one is begruding anyone the new style, but limiting this to that ONE STYLE of MP is a mistake IMHO. There are too many people that enjoy playing competitively online and that play as members of a team using solid tactics and teamwork to screen them out by design.


EDIT:For those interested you can find the thread I mentioned HERE (http://gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=224431&page=&view=&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1)

[Cpt.Stukan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JS11111:
If this is the only multi player offered then this game is not going to do as well as thought. First, everyone wants to play as an individual on the battlefield. If this was not the case then the games like COD,DOD,BF1942 would never have made it. So for you guys saying that controlling a squad etc is better you are wrong. The game will do alright but without the capability of online play like the games mentioned then it will not live up to its full potential. The community is saying something quite obvious. They want online multiplayer capability like the rest of the gaming community. How can anyone defend a multi-player option of 4 vs 4 if that is what I read correctly. This does not allow you to have clans or for a large online community. I think the idea is great for single players etc. It is getting very evident that this game is probably not going to be what everyone thinks its going to be. The company obviously is going towards the XBOX route for pure profit and that is why they are only offering this kind of multiplayer option. Do not think the xbox can handle a multiplayer crowd too large. I hope I am wrong because then I will just wait until the Resistance and Liberation mod comes out for the HL2 engine. Hope the developers realize what everyone keeps saying. There are always going to be people on forums that are defenders of everything. They will defend everything the dev. say or do. They are called followers. It is obvious that I have been following the game myself since I am posting here. I will give my opinion that many more people want the game to have the multi-player capability stated above than a new 4 vs 4 situation. This style does not AGAIN allow for a large online community. But once again this system would be geared towards the XBOX crowd then. Anyone who knows comps will know what I am saying. Of course I will buy the game for the PC when it comes out. However, I know many people waiting to see if it has a normal online play. They will then buy the game. That is my two cents so you defenders can blast away now. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It's 2v2 , u can have community, and clans....watch your mouth

[LT_Richard]

i agree i british and i get fed up of playing as american all the time but i will be buying bia
no offence americans!

[us1945]

I like better to be a German in multiplayer!! any change??

and what about the German weapons availeble?>

I only play multiplayer,,

regards Tom
Europe

[Fyredawg]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by njcl:
lol.......all your comments/whining makes me laugh........i wont be buying BIA simply because im british and playing as an american is not immersive for me but i think the game will be good and whatever mp they choose i hope the sp is better than the moronic cod/moh... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And your calling other people whinners....... riiiight. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cpt.Stukan:
It's 2v2 , u can have community, and clans....watch your mouth <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Watch your mouth huh? Please dont tell me your one of these internet "tuff" guys. Cause they are getting really tired. People are allowed to have different opinions than you I promise. Thats what they make these places for. I dont think there is anyone here that does NOT want to see the MP game type that they have spoken about. Not at all. I do think that there are just tons of folks that want to see some traditional game types included. As things stand right now AI opponents currently are no where near as good as human controled players. The AI right now simply can't do it, not in a fluid MP enviornment. Here is something simple to base it on. A hypothetical sitution so to speak. You're given the opportunity to win one million dollars. To win you simply have to win 7 out of 10 games (you pick the game and for that matter type) you will get 9 "bots" to play with you on your side and you will be playing against 10 human players. Guess you'll be going to work monday eh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Im sure it will be fun, I am sure it will be something neat and different, but there are too many of us out here that want a WWII based TACTICAL shooter. This game has all the markings of being just that game, all we want is to see some traditional MP game types. To say that someone is whinning, is silly.


Lt Richard, us1945

I agree with you both. I personally have been just dying for a game based on the battles of Arnhem and the outlying Village of Oosterbeck.

And if done correctly a game from the german viewpoint might just actually be good.

[SpecTre1981]

lmao, what is with u brits always whining about having to play as an american, i mean cmon get real, isnt the racist **** over with already, who cares if u play as an american, i am german by blood american by birth i play games where i am german, russian, japanese, british, american. i mean what the hell is the big deal if the game is good and u like it then buy, unlike some,and i quote" i will not be buying a BIA game simply because i am british" lmao, ur a joke. i really get fed up with ppl that gripe at one person to another because he from a differnt country, race, whatever it may be.... grow the f*** up already and buy the darn game and play, and u lil whiny sissy a** cry babies that put negative feedback on the game and its nowhere near the release date..... wait till the game comes out, play a demo or whatever. find someone who has it and then make a judgment call...

[cheksixx]

Nope. That sucks. I don't like this.
I buy and play games expressly to MultiPlay.
I will not buy BIA if this mode is in place when the game ships.
This will prevent clans and competition.
I can't be more disappointed. Just like that! I am not really that excited about this game anymore.

[wolfhound338]

Guys lets just wait an see.
I'm really looking forward to this game so at least wait till it's out.
Anyway...... we waited HOW LONG for P.A, and tbh i'm not overly empressed.So let give B.I.A a chance to get on the market .

Signed a Derry/Irish dude..........:P

[chadw.]

dude i think it will be great. i mean come on its all to boring, just the same old ****... join a team, kill the other team, win. whats so much fun about that anymore anyways... its just like HL, MOHAA and SH,CoD,and jesus i can go on and on!

[Wingasaurus55]

i am sure that the multiplayer will be better than that of Halo 2

[Bu11eTJuNkiE]

ARG! this is making me mad first of all call of duty is BS. Message to Miles. We do not have call of duty for this. Call of duty doesnt even come close to this game. The gameplay looks so different and so much better and not as boring at watching the clock on the second hand go around 13,000,000 times! thats about how fun cod is. I agree with what boss___hogg said Why cant we have the option? This is really not allowing us much freedom if we cant even choose that!

[Bu11eTJuNkiE]

i also thought PA came out a lot worse then i thought. Lets not have BiA do this by no even allowing us the option of Choosing how weak is that?

Second, chadw. no duh other games are like that also have you noticed the games that you listed all at one point for a long time got a lot of people to play multiplayer. Also this game is new! This has newer stuff. What your using mohaa as an example? that game was made years ago. We have better technology to make the games funner now without having to change the multiplayer. Im sorry to everyone that is looking forward to this multiplayer and i respect the developers for putting all this research and time in making this game. It just the game isnt finished until you have the choice of what kind of multiplayer you would like to play. Plus another thing. CLANS, they kick ***, but if you only have 4 people per server which means that would limit it 2 vs 2 on clans. thats not a clan that a partnership. It would be virtually impossible to have an actual clan.

[PresidentSkroob]

cough mods for pc cough.. also this game is sp focused, so i dont c y all of u expect so much from the mp

[TsF_Silver]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by boss___hogg:
This article over a eurogamer gives us some rather worrying news about BIA multiplayer.

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=57043

------------------------
"Eurogamer: Tell us about the multiplayer facet of BIA.

Stephen Palmer: Multiplayer is pretty unique - we're doing something a little different. We didn't want to just throw in a standard multiplayer game of Deathmatch, so we've taken the best parts of single-player, which we think are the squad combat and the squad tactics and we've amended the multiplayer so you can play with up to four players, and each player is commanding one or two squads of AI characters, depending on how many of you there are; if there's four of you you'll get one squad, if there's two of you you'll get two squads. The idea is it's also mission-based so there's a number of multiplayer missions and they all have unique objectives and you'll use your squad to solve those.

Eurogamer: Is that the only multiplayer mode you get?

Stephen Palmer: Yes that's the extent of it, but as I said each mission is unique, with different objectives."
------------------------

Sounds a bit **** to me! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It really sounds great to me! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
But how will the clanmatches be? -/TsF/=> Clan wants to play Brothers in Arms on ClanBase (http://www.clanbase.com) but if there can only play 4 players at the same time in the same server, all clanmatches should be 2vs2 maximum? Or am I wrong, can someone please give me more information about this? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
Thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

P.S: Will it be a world-wide release?

[m33p0rizor]

I think it sounds great!
But i can't understand why they don't add the usual multiplayer to the Coop-multiplayer mode, like in Raven Shield (also by ubisoft).
And as Silver said, how will a clanmatch look like? Who finishes a mission first? :-/

[simple.shadow.]

Nicely put Fyredawg.

I will say that I am beyond excited about this game! I love WWII shooters that implement realism and this game seems to be adding up to all the good stuff many of us enjoy in tactical WWII shooters. I'm currently plaing CoD:UO and have played all pc WWII shooters (HD2, BF42, etc.) and I see this game having the potential to blow them all out of the water.

However, while I am extremely excited to play the new multiplayer version for something new and different, I will say it may be dissapointing to see the traditional gametype versions where each player controls a character not available in BIA. Multiplayer is what "I think" (I'll put that in quotations just in case some of you decide to chew me out for stating my opinion) gives a game its lasting appeal and replay-ability.

I know there are many others who feel the same way as me. I'm currently in a clan and many of my clanmates are being a little cynical of the game due to the possibility of a lack of total team tactics. Being able to only have a 2v2 game would totally destroy the huge WWII fps gamer base for this game. I don't suppose the gametype will ruin the game entirely, because as someone else has already said, this game seems to be focusing primarily on the single player aspect of the game, but I can see a lot of people getting bored with the game after not being able to have a clan. The new gametype, as stated in the BIA faq page, does sound like a good idea and a step in a new direction. I'm very intrigued to play it, but the community is huge so why not just add a typical gametype that so many players have grown acustomed too? I don't think it would be all too hard to do. Practically the same as the one they plan to use minus the AI characters. I personally enjoy the big games and having the chance to meet others and build good teamwork through games.

I guess the reason I am so concerened is because I really am super excited about this game. I am literally counting down the days. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

So, now is your to chew me out for stating an opinon that challenges BIA. I think some of you should really watch what you say about others opinions. This is a forum, which in the Webster dictionary means "A public meeting or assembly for open discussion." "Open" meaning "Affording free passage or access." We all (hopefully) live in a democracy in which the purpose is to promote freedom, so don't jump on others and make negative comments about what they had to say. Instead, logically prove them wrong rather than say they are with erroneous arguments.

[TennesseeTitans]

I am looking forward to something innovative and new in mp. However simple.shadow. is right, this game is being used to honor veterans and tells the story of normal men in extraordinary situations. I think their main focus is singleplayer. Multiplayer adds replayability to a game. I think there should be traditional game types for the sake of clans. However, I would still probably only play the new MP mode.

[Shifty888]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Cpt.Stukan:
It's 2v2 , u can have community, and clans....watch your mouth <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No you can't. People who like WWII games, are all playing call of duty or Battlefield right now. I can assure you that a big noone of them are going to enjoy moving onto new games that support a wopping 4 players. You can't have a clan if you can only play with 3 others at a time. You cant have a community if leagues cant support matches with more than 2v2 (very pathetic). Bots are just a hassle and will likely get in your way, they just aren't advanced enough.

All you petty fanboys have to realize this, and stop pretending that this will be a good thing for BIA. People want innovation, yes, but not at the expense of what they already have and love. If 2v2 is all we're gonna get, BIA is going to be a short lived singleplayer only game for people who don't see the big picture (ie: play by themselves more often than not).

[Bu11eTJuNkiE]

Yes! nice said shifty888 that is wut iv been trying to say all along.

[TrueEnemy]

eh

[AlwaysDead]

I look forward for the new multiplayer system of BIA. I think there are so much mp fps for WWII, and it will be more with the new mods like www.resistanceandliberation.com (http://www.resistanceandliberation.com) for HLâ².
But playing mp on a tactical basis with an AI team is something new and i have high hopes for this kind of mp gameplay.
PPL who are complaining that this kind of gameplay will lack the support of clan gaming should keep in thier minds that there are also clans for Warcraftâ³ and C&C.
An other thing that seems positive for me is that this kind of gameplay (with 4 players)donâ´t need big dedicated servers, so u can, with a decent internet connection, open ur own games and play with friends and u donâ´t have to deal with those masses of a.sholes who makes oline gaming sometimes worse than a rootcanal treatment at my dentist.

[Jason-Alaska]

A new way to play multiplayer... I like it!

[hroncevic]

I like the idea of new multiplayer, I think it is really really great.
But I would love to have the option of playing standard search/destroy or similar game types.

Great job guys, I cant wait to get the game

[indylavi]

This MP mode is not new. Operation Flashpoint has had this since it was released a couple of years ago. The ability to lead an AI team into combat against other players and their squad of AI, or all human VS AI. The difference is that in OFP you get to choose IF you want human or AI players. The problem with AI is… well, that it’s AI.

Now every developer likes to state that their AI is the best AI ever, but I can guarantee you that you’ll still have to baby-sit the AI players. That’s something I don’t want to do. With a human I usually don’t have to worry about them firing into a wall and giving away our position with no chance of hitting anything. I don’t have to tell them to turn around because they are facing the wrong direction and can’t hear the enemy firing 10 feet behind them. I don’t have to instruct them to get behind the wall that is 2 feet from them instead of just standing there.

The problem is also the 4vs4 limit. Now my squad is a rather small squad of only 16 players. So if we all want to play we have to create 2 different servers. The MP might be fun but limiting the MP to just 1 single mode is a very lackluster move.

[kreative.]

Speak for yourself... sounds awesome to me!

[lipton1041]

ok in the e3 demo it shows you leading guys, but you can stand out in the open and you dont even get hit!! in multyplayer the only person that will challenge you is the other online person, i mean you will prob take out eachother's squad and end up having a one on one battle, this is my guess, i think it might be like this but we cant be sure can we!!!! for the game aint out yet!!!!!

[ezfrog]

Earlyer today I did some e-mail chat with one of the Devs at Gearbox and wanted to shear it with the community here it is...

I hear all this bad talk about how all AI sucks in the forums. I was hoping you guys could talk to the forums about the AI development and how good the AI really is for both SP and MP. Also what actions have been taken to improve the AI in BIA.

Thanks E

On what forum did you read this? Our AI is really good. Since our game hasn't shipped yet, and no one has played it but the press - who write great things about our AI - I wonder how anyone was able to judge it.

-S

I heard this on http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=frm&s=400102&f=238101043 that alot of people are ranting and raving about the MP, and I agree the game is not out yet and i look forward to playing with the AI troopers but i was wondering if you could describe the ins and outs of the AI on Gearbox software Developer's Diary web site so the fan community may get a greater tast of whats to come.

Thanks E

I just did some chit chatting and some talking about our MP and press and such as that.

Sounds like the good folks in marketing have a plan to release MP information to the public soon.

Our MP is very unique... so it's kind of an exciting thing... glad to hear we're finally gonna tell the world about it. :-)

So be on the lookout for new info soon!

-S

[TrueEnemy]

Thanks for that, EZfrog.

now I have something to look forward to besides the release http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

[Bia_Fan]

I dont know what all this disappointment regarding the MP is all about, and its a pity some people wont purchase the game due to the style of MP offered, but realistically its their loss.

As for the 2vs2 system, I can only guess that this has been used to keep the tactics in the game. If they were to let the entire swuad be controlled by humans then the main realistic factor of this game, the requirement for tactics would become obscelete as the human players just attack in one mass, why would they try and supress the enenmy and flank them for? Im of the beleief in short that they have made in 2vs2 to ensure the players use tactics as opposed to brute force.

When it all comes down to it, this game is about honoring those who fought, not to get a giggle out of ganging up on people in MP

[reb2000]

Us lan gamers have been waiting for something like this since h and d 1. We dislike d and d 2, it doesnt have the same feel as h and d 1. I do admit, the first one was buggy as hell.
If you like playing everyone for himself, with no leaders, you dont deserve to play a real ww2 game.
We need B in A soon!!
Thanks
Reb (ww2 online player)

[simple.shadow.]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Im of the beleief in short that they have made in 2vs2 to ensure the players use tactics as opposed to brute force. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You make a great point Bia_Fan. Although I am quite skeptical of Gearbox's multiplayer mode for BIA, your comment reminded me of how untactical some games are.

Take for example Call of Duty. The game in and of itself is not very tactical. Unmodded or stock CoD is mainly all "brute force" as you said. It takes a lil' modding, a clan match, and teamspeak to make the game tactical. I love it when the game is played tactical with no mercy or forgiveness in the moves your squad makes.

I have no doubts that the new multiplayer will be incredibly fun; however, I will miss playing with a larger community of players. I don't see why they can't just add on a normal multiplayer mode anyways.

I guess we can't say anything 'till we get further news. Only time will tell I suppose.

Thanks for the news too ezfrog! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

[SmokerBIA]

I think this Multiplayer will be a blast, its something new, which I always like. I'm not sure about this one, but what would be cool is if you could do 4 real players, each one have a squad, and 2 people are on the same team. So there is a team of 8. I think this would be really fun to do, to square off with 2 other people and their squads. I guess I can see why people may be mad because there is only 4 people in one game, but there will probably be a lot less lag this way too, and this gives the game more a of srategical feel.

[XOskeletal]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifI can't wait to try out this new MP way of fighting. People don't usually work together in the other games, not general pub play anyways. In fact the usually get in the way and do stupid things to get you killed. Having control over a squad each will be awesome I think. And since the games will be smaller hopefully the lag wont be so bad, I f***ing hate laggers. Lag is what ruins MP games the most IMO. The clan of people I game with are only 6 so it wont be a big deal we never had huge wars lol. Can't wait http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

[Bu11eTJuNkiE]

sorry dude i cant agree with you there. when you said people dont work together. Well this multiplayer didnt fix taht problem they eliminated it which made it a bigger problem. Plus i was hoping for a community. Trust me i dont care what anybody says your not gonna a community even close to call of duty. I think this game could easily beat cod IF they add the classic multiplayer. But becuase of this i am planning on playing Battlefield 2 when it comes out.

[dmg_ashe]

Problems with BIA, multiplayer mode:

The longevity of games is based primarily upon the games multiplayer enjoyment. People enjoy playing multiplayer games together on the the same server. Thus clans are born. This game style would appear to almost eliminate clans and any kind of ladder match play associated with it. After all, who wants to be on a ladder to brag about "My bots just kicked your bots a%#!!"

This style of gameplay will be doomed from the start. The frustration involved with watching some AI morons run into each other will surely turn off the average fan. By the time the patches are released, it will be too late. If you dont believe me, ask the boys from EA how Pacific Assault is doing. They announced the first patch before the official, non dvd game came out. Now the average person has heard how bad it is and wont buy it.

[XOskeletal]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifIf the bots are that bad then it will come down to the real people real quick,btw there are lots of 1v1 3v3 type ladders for other FPS games. you could have even more clan wars where more people can get to play. Whats to stop you from dividing up your clan to fight 3 other clans at once if you had 6 people in it??. I personally have been in clans (20 people) with clan wars going on (6vs6)and people get to sit on the bench all the time because they are not so skilled as some of the other players http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
It's a matter of perspective, people are scared of new things. Or they just like to run and gun, not a strategic bone in their body. The people whinning about this mode of play must suck I would imagine, I imagine they rely on the more skilled players in their clans to make them look good http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif
I welcome this mode of play and I will definately be a part of the community. I play a strategy game call Combat Mission Barbarossa to Berlin, the community is not huge but it is big enough for an older game and it has it's niche. The forms are always active and so on. If you don't like what the devs are doing don't buy the game, don't play it, I don't care because I'm sure there will be enough people in to something new and different like this to have a nice dedicated community. Probably the more mature players out there is my guess.
And I don't care what anyone says, it's easier and better for two people to work together as a team than 16 people at oncehttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

[dmg_ashe]

XOSkeleton....
Dont get personal over peoples opinions and speculations. No need to say that

"Or they just like to run and gun, not a strategic bone in their body. The people whinning about this mode of play must suck I would imagine, I imagine they rely on the more skilled players in their clans to make them look good"

Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Now back to what I was saying. Look at the most popular and longest running FPS games. CS, Mohaa, COD, BF42, even Wolfenstein. They are built around stong multiplayer gaming. Now look at a game called Deadly Dozen. Decent WW2 game, but a typical squad combat game. Guys standing around while getting shot at. Running where they shouldnt be running....etc. It is frustrating at times to play this in single player against stupid ai from the opposing side. Think of how annoying its going to be to play multiplayer with actual people on the opposing side.

[XOskeletal]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifWell correct me if I am wrong but forums are for personal opinions, and all I am doing is stating mine http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
How can you can compare the AI in this game to any other game? Did you try the game? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif
I have been playing video games since they have been conceived and I agree AI was generally stupid, but I recall certain points in time in certain games where the AI has surprised me. Syphon Filter the original for example. I remember the level you had to make it through a warehouse type level in the midst of two fighting factions. Anyways, I had a sniper rifle and put a bead on an enemies head. Typically in any other game I played up until that point in time it would have been a simple pull of the trigger done. But what happened was the AI turned and spotted me! DUCKED, WTF? my bullet hit the wall missing the mark. My point is don't bash the AI until you have personally expierienced it, give it a chance you might be surprised.
You might be right, it definately would not be the first time I am disappointed in a game. But I will be an optimist amongst so many pessimists, in the hope of playing something new and different, instead of playing another game in a mountain of clones. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

[mutantsheep254]

i think that whoever says that this game's multiplayer system looks sleezy, crappy, corny, stupid, lame, etc. is a ------------------

[MajorMFN01]

^^You'd be banned in a heartbeat if you came to my house talkin' like that. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif lol

So... can anyone tell me if this game will have online capabilities? Such as... Live? Maybe it's been said in this thread already, but I honestly couldn't bare to read the entire thread. After the first page I wanted to vomit.

My opinion, as if anyone here cares about opinions, is that the AI will be something we haven't seen in a FPS. Meaning it will most likely be teh shizznit.
But I do like multiplayer. And I do like online multiplayer even more. So I want to get with 2, 3 or 4 of my online buddies and go head to head against 2, 3 or 4, let's say Frenchmen because they're always fun to snipe.http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
Kidding ofcourse. Or am I?
But I will end up buying this game anyway. Even if just for single player.

My only wish is that there would be an online mode as well.

[XOskeletal]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifGeez man, your question is answered with the first post in this thread,you did not have to read the whole page. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=238101043&m=2091023632&p=1
thats what all the fuss is about http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif 4 human players max (online).
LMAO, do you know where UBI is? Or that the people making this awesome game possible are french, lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif
You can insert your foot in your mouth now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
So I guess you can only get online with 1 of your buddies and take on two french guys. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

[Bia_Fan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> This style of gameplay will be doomed from the start. The frustration involved with watching some AI morons run into each other will surely turn off the average fan. By the time the patches are released, it will be too late. If you dont believe me, ask the boys from EA how Pacific Assault is doing <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but this statement really has minimal basis. Pacific Assault didnt offer revolutionary AI, BIA is offering this along with the ability to perform standard operating procedures etc. If you had researched this game at all, ie watched the E3 Demonstration it would become quickly evident that the AI is somewhat special in this game. Its hard to make such a judgement without even playing the game yet, especially in light of previous posts such as this which indicate what one of the Devs at gearbox has said

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Our AI is really good. Since our game hasn't shipped yet, and no one has played it but the press - who write great things about our AI - I wonder how anyone was able to judge it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Our MP is very unique... so it's kind of an exciting thing... glad to hear we're finally gonna tell the world about it. :-) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Two-Five-One]

It's not the strength of the AI that will kill the game MP, it's the fact that there's a max of 4 players per game. MP games are made and broken by the audience playing them. Look at the popularity of WWII FPS games like BF1942, CoD, and DoD. High numbers of players. The mainstream market of PC gamers doesn't care about how tactical the MP aspect is. The demographic for PC FPS games probably contains mostly 16-25 year olds. And what 16-25 year olds want is fast-paced, adrenaline-rush type action that games like BF1942 and CoD provide. Ubi would be appealing to a very small group by just making a 2v2 MP dominated by issuing orders to bots. They'd be in effect trying to combine FPS and strategy games, and I doubt that they can appeal to a large crowd this way. Personally, I would like an MP like this for awhile, but I'd get bored and go to a HL2 mod like RnL or DoD:S. It appears Ubi is marketing this game to Xbox users MP-wise. The SP still looks extremely promising and this is definitely a must-buy.

[T1A_Wd.Maker]

Please, if anyone who is in charge of BIA is reading this, please put normal dm and tdm in the mp section. What you plan to do is great, but without clans and clan wars, it wont be the same. Please.

Serious online player.

[diesel-gas]

I dont like the sounds of this 4 on 4 mutli-player..It will never take off..We need/want 32 man servers filling up...the game is just more fun with more people on in DM mode..Dont be like MOH:Pacific Assault greasing our palms then it turns out be a flop...

[MajorMFN01]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by XOskeletal:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gifGeez man, your question is answered with the first post in this thread,you did not have to read the whole page. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=238101043&m=2091023632&p=1
thats what all the fuss is about http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif 4 human players max (online).
LMAO, do you know where UBI is? Or that the people making this awesome game possible are french, lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif
You can insert your foot in your mouth now http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif
So I guess you can only get online with 1 of your buddies and take on two french guys. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure. I'd love to snipe your head someday. In the game ofcourse. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Getting your kicks out of bashing people that are new here... It must be quite a life you have.
You have no clue as to who I am, you automatically assume that I'm some kind of idiot because you can't take the time to simply explain things. Throw insults and useless phrases at people instead. You're how old? 12?

And you can't be serious. I read the first news article, and please quote to me where it says exactly how many people will be able to play in a single party at any given time, and that it will be online capable. I read "Mul-ti-player" Not online use. Multiplayer could mean you and your "buddy", as if you have any, sitting (or doing whatever you do together) on your desk chair together playing two player.

Wow. Again.

[Dutch_vn38416]

I am very happy that they chose this kind of multiplayer. I'm tired of seeing companies side with the masses and wind up making crappy games. I'm also tired of seeing 10 and 11 year olds ruining games (Like COD, UO with thier run and gunning and bunny hopping), finally a game that will have a multiplayer that is for tactical players, and more mature players. I think this is just what the gaming industry needed, less arcade and more tactics. If this pisses off the masses, and they complain that its not the multiplayer they want and they want buy it, I will thank God, because I see BOTH those things as a good thing.

[ltz1972]

Better WW2 MP game. (http://redorchestramod.gameservers.net/)

I for one am **** glad they left out DM/TDM.

Objective based MP is the way to go!
Let us hope that they also left out "bunny-hopping" as well!!

LTZ

[vani11agori11a]

I was hoping this game would be like the original ghost recon in a ww2 setting, and with vehicles in multiplayer via xbox live. from what ive read in this thread it sounds like its going in a completely diff direction. im dissappointed with ubi's latest release ghost recon 2, the gameplay is slow and unpolished, on xbox live it has many problems, and doesnt seem like it was beta-tested at all. ***** TO ALL THOSE FOLKS AT UBI***** I like to play new and innovative games, that is what attracted me to ghost recon and halo and other fps's in the first place but please take the time to fix problems, and get feedback from people who play the games before you release them.

[Dutch_vn38416]

Vani, you realize that this is Brothers in Arms, not Ghost Recon 2 or 3? Its going to be completely differnt

[Two-Five-One]

ltz1972, you realize that there is a max of four (4) players per game, right?

Dutch, there's no reason at all to ship the game with only one MP mode. They're only alienating people.

S&D is one of the most popular modes for MP in CoD. Look at CS, it has objective style gameplay. Even BF1942 has objective style gameplay (CTF). Ubi would be completely overlooking consumers if they shipped BiA with a 2v2 multiplayer mode only. This game's MP element will last infinitely longer if it shipped with AT LEAST the ability to have 32-player games, whether in DM or objective-driven gameplay. I'm not saying to remove the 2v2 system, as this appeals to the "mature" players. All I'm saying is add on other modes like DM and CTF with 32-player capability. Why not please everyone instead of just >1,000 people?

[Bia_Fan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> there's no reason at all to ship the game with only one MP mode <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Although I agree their should be more MP modes, only because I want people to buy this game so a sequel comes out, but Im sure there are valid reasons why they have made it only a 2vs2 game. One reason comes to mind is that maybe this game isnt designed for little children or people who want to play bull**** war games, this is a realistic, or as realisitic as possible tactical war game which is based on a REAL LIFE group of men who fought in WW2. By giving options to play MP in different modes such at search and destroy it would be degrading the soldiers who died for our freedom, just so certain individuals can muck around slaughtering everyone on a particular map. I believe this may be one view point of the creators of BIA, your not just playing with fictional characters (although their names aernt correct), your playing as Sgt. Matt Baker, a man based on Sgt Summers, who was the leader of 3d Squad, 3d Platoon, Fox Company, 502 Parachute Infantry Regiment, 101st Airborne.

I think some people have to put in context some issues in this game, this isnt COD or MOH, you want to play Search and destroy etc play them. Maybe Im being a little to serious, but to me, you dont create a game which was based on real people to provide 10 yr olds with some enjoyment. No doubt you have some fun, but whinging because you wont get the ability play certain game types, which dont allow for realism is pety

[Dutch_vn38416]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Two-Five-One:
ltz1972, you realize that there is a max of four (4) players per game, right?

Dutch, there's no reason at all to ship the game with only one MP mode. They're only alienating people.

S&D is one of the most popular modes for MP in CoD. Look at CS, it has objective style gameplay. Even BF1942 has objective style gameplay (CTF). Ubi would be completely overlooking consumers if they shipped BiA with a 2v2 multiplayer mode only. This game's MP element will last infinitely longer if it shipped with AT LEAST the ability to have 32-player games, whether in DM or objective-driven gameplay. I'm not saying to remove the 2v2 system, as this appeals to the "mature" players. All I'm saying is add on other modes like DM and CTF with 32-player capability. Why not please everyone instead of just >1,000 people? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Could they possibly add more MP modes in a patch, certianly. It maybe be that the reason that they are not releasing the game with MP modes out the wazoo is to dissuade the people who just go for a game's multiplayer purposes. Lokk at COD, in a patch the implimented other modes. Maybe even someone in the community can mod other modes. Even if they don't, and you are still dissapointed in the game, you will always have COD, UO and BF42(for what that is worth) to go home to. As for us (the so called few, minority) we will look forward to playing this game, as realistically as possible. Thats what I hoped for with COD, or UO. Unfortuantly those companies decided to play to the so called masses and make a great game, an arcade fps, which completly ruined it. UO like its predesecor COD will never be good untill there are some decent realism modes in and server admins who will stricly enforce no r a ging or hopping or map glitch using and others.

[Two-Five-One]

The CoD patch added one mode that attracted about two dedicated servers. If this game hopes to compete MP-wise with any of the other WWII FPS out there, it will HAVE to SHIP with alternate MP modes. And why would you dissuade people from buying your game? There's no sense in preventing sales to spite people who buy games for MP. I buy PC games for MP because most SP has very little replayability value. If I want to try a game's SP then I'd rent it (this isn't the case with BiA, Ubi has my money regardless http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif). Patched gameplay modes are generally not popular among leagues and clans, and I for one don't want to check everyday to see if they patched a new MP mode. With all the WWII mods set to come out early next year on the Source engine, BiA may be forgotten (MP-wise) before it ever gets off the ground.

It's certainly not hurting anyone to add more MP modes without removing the existing on. Look at CoD; if you don't like a mod, you don't have to play it. I'm just slightly concerned that such a promising game would be limited by unintentional hubris regarding an innovative MP mode.

EDIT: It's beginning to appear that PC users are getting shafted when it comes to this game. This 2v2 gameplay will appeal mainly to LAN and Xbox Live, neither of which I use. I'm just hoping that BiA becomes a popular Internet game.

[Crowe1983]

Hey guys, first post here. I just wanna say i'm looking forward to seeing exactly what MP is like...I welcome a new kind of MP...I'm so sick of run and gun pieces of ****. CoD feels like the furthest thing from ww2 i can think of, and DoD bores me to death anymore with americans standing no chance against 1 shot kill "railguns" and 0 recoil submachineguns. Also, you guys should know better by now that if BiA does not have a MP mode thats all humans vs humans, some modder will make a mod where there is that type of MP. I've never been so excited over a video game before. I was starting to lose all hope for realism in video games, but now this games got me going out and buying a new PC to run it. I'm also keeping my fingers crossed for some sort of anticheat. So anyway, if you guys all want run and gun BS games, why not stick with crappy games like CoD and MoH? They were made to satisfy the lame quake fans in a ww2 environment...not trying to be mean....just saying i'm stoked for this game and that MoH, DoD, and CoD can go to hell for all i care anymore.

[Two-Five-One]

Actually, the SMGs in DoD are all the same. And the BAR scores more kills on most servers than the K98k.

Point is, people don't want to wait around for a modder to take 6 months to create a new MP mode. And it's definitely not hurting anyone, ANYONE at all, to include more than a narrow-minded 2v2 mode.

[J_Bigglesworth]

The option of having the tactical side of the game and a regular mp game mode makes the most sense. When you take a look at games like COD and MOH they have survived for as long as they have because of the replayability offered. A big no no would be some sort of TDM or DM mode as these are they cause the most grief from the spray and pray majority. A mp gametype such as Search and Destroy from COD or even some sort of limtied spawn take and hold would open the game up.

2v2 is a tiny server and it would get rid of a lot of the lag but part of the fun a multiplayer game is the banter from a larger number of people on the server. When you play strategy games with a small number of people in a server the game loses a certain something which is only found in large servers.

I think a 6v6 or even 8v8 server size is a much better option but i doubt any server could hande the 64 bots needed to stop an all out lag fest!!! Maybe smaller player controlled squads could solve this?

The strategic gametype looks amazing and i pray it works out well as a realistic WW2 shooter is needed. H&D2 sort of filled the gap but the AI in that was not brilliant unless ubisoft have mapped every possible anti bot F**k up scenario then the problem with the bots will still exist.

Bring on bigger servers and an option about which MP you wanna play and the game could run and run, but limit it to a 2v2 situation and risk losing a great opportunity to create an amazing game.

[JackBIA]

Dear Ubisoft,
I think BIA will be the best game i have EVER played in the world. It is released on Febuary for Xbox in UK and i saw this game and watched the demonstration movie, and to my amazment it is exactly the type of game i have dreamed that someone would design. And to chip in a comment about the multiplayer, i think thatit will be perfect because standard 1 on 1 DM gets boring after a while i like a bit on change and something better to do and BIA will do exactly that. THIS GAME WILL BE EXCELLENT !!!! I CANT WAIT !!! I have only a PS2 and after seeing this game i have bought an Xbox just because this game looks so perfect. Thank you very much i cannot wait for its release. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif))

[cheksixx]

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif And I still won't buy it if it only has the one style of MP available. Neither will any of my friends.
I said before that we couldn't wait to buy it , but now we're skeptical, and are going to wait and see what MP turns out to be.
MOHAA and CoD have several different styles of MP available; Why can't BIA? In MOHAA or CoD, you can choose OBJ, S&D, to name a few of the tactical-based MP styles. It just doesn't make sense to limit your options. Why pander to a minority of player's wishes when you can capture the entire community?

[ArTsKiLLaRy]

Blah Blah, I wouldn't even judge the game period until it has been played by the consumer. I am tired of these people who assume a game will suck. For all we know it might be hella good...Besides the MP seems to be more squad based which is great. Because it will give the players the oppurtunity to get more into depth with the commands etc. So for now, keep all negative remarks to yourself, and save them for last...Latez

[BNC-Sniper]

Listen, if you're not interested in a squad-based, realistic first-person shooter, then BIA is not your game. If you want a Deathmatch where everyone is running around with thompsons and other machineguns, people spawning right next to you, average life of 20-30 secs each time you spawn, go play Call of Duty. Believe me, that kept me interested for a bit, but after a while it became sickening. Spraying and praying is not a skill, not real combat.

[Two-Five-One]

cheksixx hit the nail on the head.

People are assuming that because it's a different mode from their 2 squads vs. 2 squads it's spray and pray.

Look at the market for WWII FPS games; games like CoD and BF1942 have sold hundreds of thousands (maybe millions) of units on PC. The mode I suggest has no AI squad but it is objective based, ala S&D in CoD or some take-and-hold style combat, ala DoD. Just because it has modes from unrealistic, spray-and-pray games does not mean it will turn into one. Open your minds a bit. Ubi is potentially alienating a very massive group of PC game consumers by marketing this game predominantly for Xbox Live users (hence the 2v2 style).

As for PC multiplayer, sure a 2v2 style squad-based mode will be fun for awhile, but guess what? You'll either be playing on some 400 ping Internet game or LAN, because I highly doubt that the largest market for servers (CLANS) will get interested in a 2v2 game.

BNC-Sniper, look at this from the point of the developer. Why would you want people to NOT buy your game? Because that's what you're saying. Market this game to 2% of PC game consumers and Xbox Live users. There is a massive market out there, why would you ever want to lose profit by selling it mainly for consoles? No one is at all suggesting that 2v2 be removed, if you want to play that, you can play that. I'm only saying why not include more gametypes to appeal to a broader audience? Will your beloved BiA be ruined because there are other gamemodes where "noobish SMG run-and-gunners" can play how they want in 32 player servers?

ArT - I'm not saying this game will suck, I'm saying it won't be popular amongst the majority of PC game consumers. Very few people buy servers aside from clans in normal FPS games. And I can tell you the 2v2 mode they propose will not be popular among clans. Without clans to buy servers, you'll have very few servers to play on. If more options are included for MP, the popularity of the 2v2 game mode will increase, hence you'll have more servers.

BiA has great potential. Beautiful landscapes and graphics, intense action, realism. I'm only hoping the PC multiplayer element won't be dragged down by a single mode of play that appeals to very few people.

[Natural_Killah]

This game type sounds a aweful lot like Full Spectrum Warrior. Maybe not exactly but very similiar indeed. I will be the first to tell you, I owned FSW and that **** got old REAL quick.

[TennesseeTitans]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> I think I understand why people want team DM or whatever in this game, though, too.

I mean, you can look at some screenshots and watch a video and realize that the graphics and immersion is just several notches above what you might already be playing.

So, if you're currently playing, say, CoD multiplayer and you like it, then you see the BiA stuff, it's totally natural to want to have the BiA stuff just replace the same game play you're already enjoying.

I can understand that.

But, we made a commitment to innovate. We made a commitment to spend our resources providing a sense of real squad combat using authentic fire and move tactics. We made a commitment not just to reward the player with the fastest reaction times or twitch skills, but to reward the player who can think and outwit an opponent as well.

I don't know how it's going to turn out. Perhaps the number of people who play BiA online won't match the number of people who are playing Halo 2 on-line right now. But, I bet the people who play BiA will be really, super hard-core and loyal. BiA is the only game like it - you can't get this experience with any other game available.

You can get deathmatch or team deathmatch in lots of places and I'm sure that other games will just keep churning out the same, old game play modes you've played over and over again.

If you want that, great.

Hopefully, if you're like us, you're hoping for something new. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This quote from Randy Pitchford (Gearboxsoftware president) posted this. Bia is staying true to tactical gamers. Can everyone just wait for Bia to come out before dishing the dirt? Everyone is just speculating.

[Two-Five-One]

Thanks for the quote, Titans. If that's how Gearbox feels, I guess nothing will change that now.

[cheksixx]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif No one who has an issue with the proposed MP system ever said that BIA would suck; We're positive that it will be a groundbreaking game full of innovation and style, along with (hopefully) true sim-level realism and graphic environments.

The issue is limiting the MP style of play choices. As an example, I still play MOHAA MP and that game is what, two, three years old? MOHAA has at least three different modes of play including DM, TDM, and OBJ. The latter, Objective, is a true tactical sim-style MP experience that forces you to think and move and make choices based on a continually changing battle situation. OBJ is not spray and pray.

MOHAA has also spawned a community, full of players dedicated to one game. The MOHAA MP community evens creates business vis-a-vis the Clan. The clans purchase servers, compete, and some clan members work in a programming role to fix glitches ( Think of the Stuka at the Destroyed Village map) and help to stop hackers by devising punk-buster like systems (Think MISSIONARY). MOHAA is an old game, but one that is still relevant, I believe, because of the game's flexibility in the MP area.

CoD sucks. I don't like Call of Duty, but for a lot more reasons than the spray-and-spray MP, with the players that jump straight up into the air about 6 feet like they were Michael Jordan, and the faulty realism (Even the modded realism servers have issues) but even CoD is fomenting a serious online gaming community due to (my opion) several factors: Many types of MP styles; A good selection of Maps (both large and small); and finally, usable vehicles.

I am confident that the Single-Player version of BIA will be a breathtaking experience for the WWII-era gamer. However, I do not spend $50-$60 a game to play SP. I can burn through the entire SP version in a game in less than a week, guaranteed. Then what? For this I will borrow the game, not buy it.

The thing that causes some of us concern is, yes, the proposed style of MP.I want very much for BIA to be a succesful enterprise. I would like to see it become a franchise, and overthrow both CoD and an old tired MOHAA. It is just some of our opinions' that it will not be the experience that we are hoping it will be.

We will just have to wait and see.

[Dutch_vn38416]

Thank God. Official word that BiA will be TACTICAL and not run and gun.

[BNC-Sniper]

Ok,ok. I forgot to mention that TDM and DM are good, they can be fun at times (AT TIMES), but unlike CoD the maps should be larger and have more spawn locations to prevent spawn-camping. I HATE that! Average life of like 2 seconds when you spawn right in front of a camper wanting to rank up in points.

[Two-Five-One]

Dutch...apparently you didn't read that quote very well, or you have trouble understanding it. The fact that BiA will not be run-and-gun has been established since Gearbox announced they were developing it. The game has been 'tactical' all the way through its development. You're attacking the argument for the wrong reason.

Multiple multiplayer gamestyles don't promote 'run-and-gun' play. It's how the devs of certain games want balanced gameplay over realism that promotes 'noob-friendly run-and-gunning.' I personally think DM is ****, but TDM and objective MP can be very fun. CoD's problem is it's highly unrealistic (respawn system=appearing out of thin air).

Randy Pitchford's quote brings up some important points. He says "...You can get deathmatch or team deathmatch in lots of places and I'm sure that other games will just keep churning out the same, old game play modes you've played over and over again..." Maybe he doesn't realize there's a very large audience that is tired of this (especially the older gamers who've been through the MOH series, CoD, BF1942, etc)? And that by making only the 2v2 MP mode, Gearbox/Ubi is addressing only a very small percentage of this group of discontented gamers. In my opinion simply implementing objective-gameplay MP will not kill the game's realism. It'll make the game even more attractive to even more people. I'm talking pretty much exclusively about this game's release on PC. I could care less about how many people play Halo2 vs. BiA on Xbox Live, and Gearbox/Ubi obviously have to take this into account. But it seems Gearbox/Ubi are intent on marketing this game predominantly for Xbox Live users and are selling the game mainly to Xbox Live users.

The fact that this thread has gone on for 5+ pages shows that there are a fairly large amount of people concerned about this, but...

It's pretty much beating a dead horse at this point.

[biggs222]

ur argument has been said over and over again, everyone knows what ur saying.

but the thing is, from what ur saying, you dont play WWII FPSs because u want a realistic/authentic experience. u play Moh or CoD because u want a "fun" game with characters dressed up like soldiers and carrying guns that look like WWII weapons, running around on mapps that ARE MADE FOR RUN AND GUN. basically u could have the same amout of fun, playing Unreal Tournement or CS, or any other Mutlyplayer FPS with a DM or TDM etc etc.

BIA is a game that will finally draw the line. it is not just going to be another good looking game that has characters dressed up like WWII sodliers running around blowing eachother away all willey nilly. its all about the authenticity. fighting the way that soldiers really fought (or as close as virtually possible). playing on maps that are consturcted from actual landscaped not made up for "balanced online play".

if that means "elienating" the so called millions of online players because they cant jump into a frag fest with their tommy gun blazing, then i say good riddince.

im glad that Gearbox software, and UBIsoft are ballzy enough to make a game that is different and not feeling like they need to slap a DM/TDM multiplayer modes just to make the extra bucks. if u havent noticed, BIA is not about throweing together another WWII quake fest. this game has been about authenticity since it was conceived 3 years ago.

adding DM/TDm now would waste all the effort and research done to make this game the most authentic WWII to date. and that is why they arent going to do it.

if u cant understand that then dont play BIA.

[DCA_ROMMEL1970]

Wow, ive seen some realy idiotic things posted ...but some of this realy takes the prize....anyhow... I think BIA should incorporate more than one style of multiplayer into there game. If they dont there gonna turn off a huge audience of ppl. Wat they have in mind might not appeal to everyone who likes the tdm kinda game.. and contrary to some of these post.. yes BIA is in it for the money as well.
So if they turn off ppl by havin only one form of mp there gonna cut there own throats.. i think they should have an option for the mp on this. And yes by the way yuu can have a tactical game with the standard tdm models that are available... i do it everynight. With multiple teams. So for those morons who think there cant be a tactical game in the standard tdm format... go back to your special ed class, and leave tactics to people who no wat there talkin bout.

[DCA_ROMMEL1970]

The problem that i see and i think others will see is that not eveyrone wants to play with AI...I certainly dont. I dont mind the smaller games 4v4 or so. But I would prefer in a multi player game to just keep up with my own butt. NOT The lives of 4 other AI charachters. I can see the single player being alot of fun like that .. but in multiplayer id like to beat the guy on the other side of the map... not beat his drones. In multi player .. my teamates / my clan mates are my squad .. .and have been for several years, im sure theres lots of teams who will agree with that. Who wants to replace half there team in a multi player game with the AI... not me. I definatley think they need to have the option on the MP... there gonna turn a huge audience away if not..Im speakin from the point of view of a multiplayer fan. I realy dont do single player games much . Im a team player and any game my team gets into we do as a whole.

[Alexei89]

If you guys think about it for a moment, you will see something that I think is being overlooked.

This game does not seem to want to be the next latest and greatest FPS. The squad-based multiplayer is obviously something different. This game is being endorsed as historically accurate and by working with squad tactics, it is more realistic.

The war was not won on individual effort. It was won by one huge team (allies) defeating the other huge team (axis). Having people run around on these historical maps spraying and praying makes the game nothing more than just another Quake clone.

IT looks like the developers are trying to do something different and fresh, rather than the same ole, same ole. If you want a FPS then play some of the others that are already out. I mean, when you look at them all, they are all really quite similar. A few things may differ here and there, but overall they are all similar. Not every WWII game has to be a FPS.

I, for one, look forward to the different style of gameplay. I think there are alot of people out there who want a more teamwork-based game instead of the typical run and gun stuff. IF you want spray and pray, then play MOHAA or COD. IF I want to use some teamwork, then BIA may be what you are looking for.

It's not bad, its just different.

Alexei

[Two-Five-One]

biggs, you obviously didn't read any posts by anyone supporting multiple gametypes. If you're going to post in a thread, at least read the other responses first. From your logic, there is no way ANYONE could play a WWII FPS for realism/authenticity because there are no WWII FPS that are real or authentic.

"adding DM/TDm now would waste all the effort and research done to make this game the most authentic WWII to date. and that is why they arent going to do it." How? Somehow implementing TDM or another team-oriented, non-AI game mode into BiA will make the sun go nova and destroy earth? What exactly are you saying here?

For about the 300th time in this thread...I DON'T WANT TO DESTROY THE REALISM OF THIS GAME. THAT HAS NEVER BEEN THE ARGUMENT FOR ADDING OTHER GAMETYPES IN MULTIPLAYER. I really don't see how you guys think adding more gametypes will utterly destroy the realism of the game. If you don't like other gametypes, you don't have to play them. Why would you want to ruin other people's fun just to uphold your farcical elitist views of how the game should be?

It's not "ballzy" to market a game to less than 10,000 people. It's a waste of money and resources, to say the least.

Again, it's clear that Gearbox/Ubi want this game to be a hit predominantly for Xbox, and are simply selling it for PC just to rake in some more cash.

Oh, and biggs...very small community = very few clans = very few servers. Those are BiA's prospects for PC with 2v2 multiplayer.

EDIT: Alexei - I'm not saying a 2v2 MP mode would be bad. It could potentially be quite fun for some players. The problem is 2v2 MP will not attract a community. And without an online, active community, multiplayer PC games go down the drain quick.

You guys seem to post about "spray-and-pray" 90% of the time. I'm not endorsing that at all, and it's ridiculous to assume that BiA will turn into a "spray-and-pray" FPS if you add more MP modes. I prefer rifles in all the WWII FPS games I play. I think some of you have an inferiority complex about being beaten at online games...which you need to overlook and just try to enjoy yourselves when you play a game. Because that's the point of a game...fun.

[TennesseeTitans]

Well first of all, I have played alot of TDM matches on all sorts of clan and realism servers. Never have I played a realistic match. There is always some idiot who joins the server and never even plays, they just stand there completely nonresponsive. Or some kid runs across the map firing their machine gun indiscriminately in all directions. Also there teamkillers, cheater, and hackers. Heck, AI ain't that bad.

Oh, and biggs...very small community = very few clans = very few servers. Those are BiA's prospects for PC with 2v2 multiplayer

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Oh, and biggs...very small community = very few clans = very few servers. Those are BiA's prospects for PC with 2v2 multiplayer <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well its 2v2, there will be plenty of servers. If not, make one and there will be enough players in no time.

Just approach the MP with an open mind. Wait until you at least play the MP before you predict its failures. With such an open market for Tactical WWII games, BIA's community could take off.

[cheksixx]

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif Some of you guys are killing us, ( I speak for my clan, all 12 of us) especially the ones that think that there will be the same number of servers that there are now for CoD, MOHAA, etc.

Do you know how much a server costs? Nobody is going to pay those prices (or clan fees) for a 2v2 server. The only "servers" you're gonna see is some un-dedicated ones, i.e. Jimmy Bob in crotch-rot South Dakota will create a server with his 5 year-old pentium II.

They're limiting their scope and being obstinate (look it up). Figure the game costs $50 to buy. NONE of my clan is going to buy if it ships this way. That's $600 that they will lose. (I know that this amount may seem trivial to some of you, but it illustrates a business lost.)

Some of your posts about realism are killing me, too. "We needed allies to win the war, blah blah blah". I'm a 12 year Army veteran with COMBAT action in both Panama and Desert Storm. If I want true realism, I'll re-enlist. I don't want nor need a realistic-combat sim, I want a game (most combat, for those of you here who have never experienced it, IS NOT that near to what you see in video games anyway).

Some of you are not getting it: We are not putting donw the gameplay, graphics, realism. We just want the same MP options as we have come to expect with similar games such as MOHAA or CoD. We wanted to migrate our clan and server to BIA.

That's all folks...

[ezfrog]

It sounds like this game is just not for you and your buddies. I'd look for another game to play like COD or something if I were you. And I dont think the DEVS have said if its a 2v2 MP for the PC, I would say hold your pants on or what ever, this game is going to wet my pants SP and MP.

[cheksixx]

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif You must change your pants a lot if you're that easily stimulated.

[Two-Five-One]

ezfrog, if they were going to have other MP for PC, I think they would have announced it. All we have to go on is their stated 2v2 mode. cheksixx is right about the servers. Did you play HL2DM when it came out (or anyone mod when it first comes out)? There were anywhere from 8-15 servers, all with 200+ pings. The companies who rent servers will see PC BiA as a poor investment to load up on on their equipment because their main customer (clans) won't be very interested in 2v2 MP.

It is not in any way detracting from the game to just add more MP modes to appeal to more players. All the "spray-and-pray n00bs" will be too busy playing TDM to bother your 2v2 game. I don't even care if TDM is added, I'd just like a objective style gameplay with 32 players and no bots.

The $600 from cheksixx's clan isn't the only money Gearbox/Ubi won't see. Plenty of people are going to be turned off by 2v2 MP. If Gearbox adds more MP modes, why would people who buy it for that suddenly want to play 2v2? Some of you need to rethink your logic.

[biggs222]

actually i remember Reading a quote from randy saying that the PC Multiplayer would be larger then the Console versions. they will keep teh human/AI bot idea but just make the number of human players larger for the PC version.

and as of right now nothing is set in stone. You can be 100% sure on the fact that there will be no DM TDM, but what u CANT be sure on is the number of Human players...the 2vs2/4vs4 are the types for the console versions.

i think all this bickering should stop until we hear some concrete news from UBI/Gearbox.

[Two-Five-One]

The E3 demo (if I'm not mistaken) was on Xbox. The game is being predominantly developed for Xbox. And if the PC version has any more than 6v6 (at 5-6 bots +1 player per squad) there will be major lag consequences. Desktop processors (mid-end, Athlon XP 1.8 Ghz - 2.2 Ghz, Pentium 2+ Ghz) and mid-end video cards (Geforce 4/5 series, Radeon 9k series) cannot handle that. You can't have 70+ entities running around shooting without some hardware lag (not to mention server lag due to lack of dedicated servers).

Please apply reason/logic to your posts before you post them. Think them out beforehand.

EDIT: PLEASE! The fanboyism must stop!

[biggs222]

if im not mistaken YOU are the one jumping to conclusions making assumptions about a game that you know very little about.

its pointless to even try and reason with you, your convinced that every decision you make about how this game is and isnt going to be is 100% correct.

just becuase someone doesnt totally agree with you dont mean that he is a "fanboy" btw

again, i think you should seriously quit wasting your time even thinking about the MP until we hear official word from some ont that DOES know what hes talking about.

but hey this is a public forum so you can go on and contiue having diarrhea of the mouth.

[Two-Five-One]

Fanboys normally flame people who don't agree with them. You just flamed me, proving my point. No one has remotely flamed in this thread until you came along and decided I was "making assumptions about a game" I know "little about." You also totally disagreed with me in a post, you stated "you can be 100% sure...there will be no DM or TDM." Proof?

I'm going on what's been posted, common sense, logic, and reason, several things you seem to callously disregard (among others). The only thing I've ever thought would be "100%" is the fact that Gearbox/Ubi would make a game with limited multiplayer, which they STATED they will and which YOU backed up. Read the Randy Pitchford quote.

I'll say this again for effect...PLEASE think out your posts before you make them. Use logic, common sense, reason, and try not to reduce yourself to flaming because you can't comprehend something.

[biggs222]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Two-Five-One:
Fanboys normally flame people who don't agree with them. You just flamed me, proving my point. No one has remotely flamed in this thread until you came along and decided I was "making assumptions about a game" I know "little about." You also totally disagreed with me in a post, you stated "you can be 100% sure...there will be no DM or TDM." Proof?

I'm going on what's been posted, common sense, logic, and reason, several things you seem to callously disregard (among others). The only thing I've ever thought would be "100%" is the fact that Gearbox/Ubi would make a game with limited multiplayer, which they STATED they will and which YOU backed up. Read the Randy Pitchford quote.

I'll say this again for effect...PLEASE think out your posts before you make them. Use logic, common sense, reason, and try not to reduce yourself to flaming because you can't comprehend something. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

excuse me but what i posted is not a flame, Im questioning your insistance that anything anyone else says, if contrary to what you say, is "lacking sence" and needs "reason"...If anything THAT is a flame to me. im sorry that ur view on what "flame" is, is warped.

as for the lack of "proof" id say that a quote form the CEO of Gearbox is proof enough.

im not blindly following everything that BIA stands for, if u read any of my other posts on this forum then u would know. All im doing in this thread is trying to let people know that their "final judgments" on what the MP is going to be like may not be correct since nothing offical has been said about the PC version.

when i said "you know very little about" i mean that you know every little about because EVERYONE KNOWS VERY LITTLE ABOUT the pc version of the mp. but you not using "logic" and "reason" didnt understand what i meant and therefore "flamed" me...ironic isnt it.

jumping to conclusion and calling people names seems to qualify as a flame to me, which, in that case makes u the flamer.

you, my friend, are a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle "black"

[ezfrog]

Mp 2v2 has only been stated for the xbox. all i'm saying is that we have not heard from the Devs yet about the and we shouldn't jump our guns. Thats all.

[Two-Five-One]

"having diarrhea of the mouth."

That's a flame, buddy. You can go on like that and eventually this thread will be closed, which is probably what you want.

I never called you anything aside from a fanboy, and that's a fact. Most fanboys don't even take offense to it. And jumping to conclusions isn't flaming, it's...jumping to conclusions. Flaming would be this: "You're an idiot who couldn't spell his way out of an 3rd Grade spelling bee. Your grammar sucks too." THAT is flaming. Saying your have poor reasoning and logic is another thing.

[Anupama]

Have read almost evrything on this tread today and feel like joining the circus http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, so here i go:
In the mid 90s I bought my first pc with the intention to play flight sims but ended up using it for playing close combat. One month I had a 200⣠phone bill after playing on the Zone http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. This game gave me a very good insight in ww2 tactics, and still use elements of what Iv learned there when I today play rvs or other games. And I also know that such a game meant a lot to other gamers as well in bringing their gameplay to higher tactical level. Iv played clan matches in 2 different rvs clans the last year, and must say that im not very impressed by the team tactics in fps today. Its not bad, but still relay a lot on aiming and shoting.
This might provoke some people in this forum, but i think i mite be a good thing with this 2vs2 gameplay. Cuz it can bring gamers with no military bacground into a more tactical gameplay so this part of the game comunity can grow. And maybe in the near future we will have even more advanced games, and people ready to play them.

[flipmotp]

Been looking at this game for awhile now, and I think its gonna be great. But only one mp mode isnt good for any game. They should add like tdm etc also, then more people will be interested and buy it. Theyre Idea is cool but you know. They should listen to the community and add more mp gametypes. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

[cheksixx]

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif absolute last post...

PLEASE READ THE POSTINGS FOR THIS THREAD CAREFULLY;

Those of us opposed to this style of MP are opposed to it because IT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

All we want to say is that there should be SEVERAL different choices, like in MOHAA or COD.
TDM, DM, OBJ, etc. The best option is the one that will please everybody.

ADD THEM ALL F***ers!

[diesel-gas]

Too many of u guys want tactical...boring ...give us our TDM...we want spawn-killing that makes the game fast paced we want to hear the loser clans crying i want to camp (awe we are leaving the ladder)...lol... if 4vs4 is the way they are gonna go with the game...it will be a bigger let down the MOH:Pacific Assualt..thanks again EA (jerks)...COD:UO has alot of potential better then the first...NOW BIA if u wanna have a fistful of money coming go TDM with 32 player avail...if u want tactical go jerk-off and see how long u can hold off for b4 blowing ur wade...my 2 cents

[Cpt.Stukan]

.Darn , sig didnt work. :P

[Cpt.Stukan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by diesel-gas:
Too many of u guys want tactical...boring ...give us our TDM...we want spawn-killing that makes the game fast paced we want to hear the loser clans crying i want to camp (awe we are leaving the ladder)...lol... if 4vs4 is the way they are gonna go with the game...it will be a bigger let down the MOH:Pacific Assualt..thanks again EA (jerks)...COD:UO has alot of potential better then the first...NOW BIA if u wanna have a fistful of money coming go TDM with 32 player avail...if u want tactical go jerk-off and see how long u can hold off for b4 blowing ur wade...my 2 cents <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>LOL , naughty little kid . The point with the game is to be a tactical shooter. Read the posts and then complain. "jerk" LOL

[Cpt.Stukan]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cheksixx:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif absolute last post...

PLEASE READ THE POSTINGS FOR THIS THREAD CAREFULLY;

Those of us opposed to this style of MP are opposed to it because IT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

All we want to say is that there should be SEVERAL different choices, like in MOHAA or COD.
TDM, DM, OBJ, etc. The best option is the one that will please everybody.

ADD THEM ALL F***ers! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Now you are talking about COD and MOH, well this isn't cod and moh, this is Bia (Brothers In Arms).And the Devs wanna try something new.
Stop complaining.

[Salvo]

I don't think they want the game to suck!. This is why they don't want to give choises like TDM, DM. This prevents. They are leaning to CO-OP based missions. It's been some time since we had a great game like that. NovaLogic had a nice series of games. They sucked like MOHAA and COD becuase they had TDM as well. The game'n world needs something new. I think this will also promote teamwork!. Less reason to hack!. I would like to see a Multiplayer against Multiplayer mode, but with an objective base type situation. I'm not talking Americas Army type ojbectives. Becuase that just turns into a Team Death match all over again. IF you want to know more about my idea let me know. I'll elaborate on a great Idea for Multiplayer Vs Multiplayer CO-Operative based Mode.

P.S Ubi as an huge fan of your games I beg you, no I implore you to not make this gam Like MOHA or COD. I play a lot of UBI games and you guys have done a bang up job with games like; Shadowbane, IL2, Pacific Fighters, Tom Clancy series of games and more. Please, stay the course despite a few people not agreeing with what you do. I'm pretty intouch with the online game world having beta'd a ton of games, and I can say that the community has been waiting for something like this for some time. They are looking for a game leaning more towards virtual battle fields. Similar to wwiionline

[diesel-gas]

hey STUKAN anytime your man enough jump on {MOB} server for MOH:AA..We are not hard to find ..I'll show you what spawn killing is all about and why the pussies want tactical...Thats all we ever hear are losers like yourself crying about spawn killing...So in short BIA aqlso include TDM...You are wasting your time with only 4vs4 tactical online availabilty

[mdcenigma]

i just want to through my two cents in. i think we need to get over it and see what they have to offer. i play a lot of multiplayer shooters and i think most games are a big jumble and have no tactics behind it. thats why i became a sniper in MOHAA to shoot the little dumb A**es that run around with MGs. i sit in the shadows and pic those little punks out. thats why i also later joined a clan with team speak[MDC](major dysfunctions conjunction) we do **** a little more tactical with the team speak but still i would like a little more squad work. i like playing with a group of ppl to work together to make **** more realistic. i say what ever make the game more realistic will make me happy. we will always be litmited to how realistic it can get unless we get off our asses and go fight a war ourselves... but we should jsut trust the game makers to do their thing. i seriously doubt that they would hand us something that they themselves dont like. i trust these guys and so should you. we should apreciate a new mp game type... who knows they might come out with a even better game type for the expansion pack. or patch. i think who ever objects this new mp game type is jstu afraid of change that might make a major impact in the multiplayer game industry. this could be the start to bigger and better mp game types for the mp shooter gameworld. then we will have these people to thank. But, i mean I seriously doubt this, but if the game type sucks, they will fix it and somehow make it better, either with a expansion pack or a patch, they will make it better.

[diesel-gas]

i dont believe a patch would fix the game type

[mdcenigma]

sure you could have you checked out call of duty? they added new game types to the game with the patch they came out with.

[TennesseeTitans]

Some of all yall that whining about the lack of TDM, DM, etc in BIA(whats the big deal?) have other prospects to look at. Many of yall have expressed interest in a realistic TDM/OBJ, World War II based multiplayer game. There is a mod for Halflife 2 called Resistance & Liberation, that claims to be realistic. Check out their site, looks quite promising. Consider this my favor to the whiners (no offense). I personally think that BIA MP will be awesome, but that just my opinion.

[Kai1910]

i hope that the game has a MP editor. read my post on it. i know its late, but the least gearbox can do is leave the coding open so a full editor can be added later!

that would solve ALL the problems anyone is having about this game.... multiplayer = anything we want

lets try to get gearbox to do everything they can to make an editor like this possible!

[indylavi]

Well, I for one don't agree that DM or even TDM should be added. However, I stand by my statement of the limited MP side. The AI no matter how good is still AI. A good example is taken right from a demo video I watched of BiA.

They were in what looked like a barn assaulting a farmhouse. About 3 were ordered to cross the path and the others were sitting in the barn. Now these 3 just run out sideways and run backwards across this path. They are engaging enemies while they do this. Naturally one of them gets shot. I loose a valuable man because of them being stupid. Why didn’t the men in the barn provide cover fire? If they did, why did the moving team slow to engage? Why did the moving team slowly move to the objective and not rush? This is what I mean by babysitting the AI. It’d be different if they were killed because they were outmaneuvered but the bot was killed because of an extremely foolish act that no tactical soldier who wanted to live would do.

Again, I don’t dislike the MP mode. From what I’ve seen the AI is quite good. However, in the end it’s still AI. All I would like to see is the ability to play tactical modes of play with all or mostly human players. Co-op, search & destroy, and/or attack & defend would be a welcome addition. I prefer tactical play and I feel if they add in modes of tactical play for human vs. human it would make the game more popular in clan matches. I will still play the game. I even pre-ordered my copy. I just feel there is nothing wrong with giving the players options to play against all humans instead of the human + AI combo that we will get.

[diesel-gas]

4 vs 4 mp will get old pretty fast http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

[TennesseeTitans]

Its 16 vs 16, including bots. Btw, judging by some of these posts, I think I would rather play against bots. At least they don't whine.

[ezfrog]

I just had a thought this morning. Everyone, you’ve heard the argument that this game is just going to be about babysitting the AI bots right? The bots are going to suck and your going to get your self killed trying to keep them alive. Will you know I wonder if that’s how some of the real COs and NCOs from WWII felt, that they were babysitting their men form time to time. So I guess that these boys at Gearbox really know what they’re doing. hmmm. Bottom Line when this game comes out we'll see who right and whose just plan stupid.

[TennesseeTitans]

You won't be babysitting your men. You click where you want them to go. They go from cover to cover, and cover each other's advance. Just watch the E3 demo. The bots behave as a trained soldier would, utilizing real world tactics on their own, while following your orders.

[Princejules]

I mean wat more could you want, you love the single player and you want to share it with someone. Complete with the squad tactics, personaly im not goin to play online as much as i will play single player, but the 1 game type in multiplayer is good for me.

Just be grateful, itl be great trust me

[Gaffa9977]

THIS IS SIMPLE TO REMEDY,just give us the OPTION to choose what MP game type we want!!!
I personaly hate DM,im not fussed on TDM i prefer objectives.As for run and gun-anyone played AASF,it doesnt happen on there its a team game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.....so more than 10 players isnt a rambo fest.