Battlefield Nation Forums - View Single Post

SRP · 07-29-2003, 08:31 PM

The folowing is an article from PC Zone
www.pczone.co.uk

Digital Illusions takes us on a tour of the successor to its smash hit PC game Battlefield 1942

17:52 Having struck the right chord with PC gamers with a penchant for multiplayer action with its World War II-themed title Battlefield 1942, developer Digital Illusions - well, subsidiary Digital Illusions Canada to be precise - is gearing up to delight us once again with 1942's full-blown sequel: Battlefield Vietnam.
Retaining Battlefield 1942's highly successful core gameplay and Hollywood-esque action and upping the ante with plenty of new features and engine enhancements, Battlefield Vietnam finds players fighting for either US or NVA and Vietcong forces and combating in representations of some of the conflict's most fierce battles.

Sounds good? Oh yes. Battlefield Vietnam producer A.J. Marini recently took a time-out from a busy schedule to tell us more about what's coming.

Why the Vietnam War as the setting for the Battlefield sequel?

Marini: When you set out to base your game on real wars, you only have a limited selection. With World War II having been so popular for so long, developers are looking for something different. When looking at interesting theatres of battle, the Vietnam War is next on the list after World War II.

It was a war with a lot of controversy. Also, it was a war that changed the way wars are waged. It isn't the big lumbering war that World War II was. It's a more dynamic and faster-paced war.

As with BF 1942, we're looking at both a single-player and multiplayer experience. BF 1942 proved to be a better multiplayer than single-player game. Will you be looking to improve heavily on single-player for Vietnam?

Marini: Yes, we are looking at improving the single-player experience. Battlefield is really a multiplayer game at its core so the single-player experience will still be built on the multiplayer concept rather than a story-driven approach. There are many alterations being discussed at this time but nothing has been finalised other than the need to improve upon it.

Although the basic premise seems to be the same as BF 1942 - infantry combat and vehicle use and combat - we expect the gameplay to be somewhat different due to the nature of the technology (Huey helicopters, for example) that's present. Can you tell us about how this technology will provide us with a different playing experience?

Marini: The way a battle is fought is really dependent on the tools at hand. This is true in reality and in Battlefield. In World War II, the vehicles were slower-paced. In Vietnam, the vehicles are faster, more manoeuvrable, and in the case of the helicopter, more versatile. This speed and versatility makes the battle more dynamic. The pilots can react to changes in the battle much faster than they did in BF 1942.

The terrain plays a big part as well. In BF 1942, the terrain was very wide open. In Vietnam, the terrain is still open, but there is a lot of vegetation around. This means that rather than hiding in buildings, your enemy can be hiding almost anywhere.

Two new gameplay elements that we've read about is lifting vehicles with helicopters and being able to shoot from vehicles. Could you go into these features in a little more detail, explaining how they impact overall gameplay?

Marini: Being able to shoot from a passenger position has been a big addition. Rather than being a passive passenger, you can now affect change in the battle. It allows for unique approaches to situations. Granted, firing a gun from a passenger position may not seem like a big deal, but dropping mines from a hovering helicopter directly into the path of an enemy tank is quite unique. In general, the feature is yet another avenue of gameplay for the players to explore.

The airlifting is another area that will intrigue players. Basically, the helicopters can hover over a vehicle and lift it away to another location. It means that a vehicle like a tank can be moved to a location on the other end of the map in a fraction of the time that it would have taken if it were to travel on its own. Of course, these vehicles need not be empty. They can be fully loaded with personnel prior to take off. That relocated tank can be firing shells at the opposing team whilst in mid flight.

What other major, core new gameplay features are you introducing to the series in Battlefield Vietnam that you haven't talked about above? For example, what new modes of play do you have up your sleeve?

Marini: For the basic game, we wanted to increase teamplay without sacrificing the ability for a single player to affect change. The most significant step made in this direction is in the way control points change hands. In 1942, a single player could easily and rapidly change control points. The number of players at the point had no bearing on the way control points changed hands.

In Vietnam, the control points will take longer to change hands but the more team members you have at a control point, the faster it changes. In other words, if it takes a single player four minutes to change a flag, two players can do it in two minutes, four players can do it in one minute, and so on. This encourages teamplay without forcing it on anyone.

For the multiplayer modes, Conquest is king and we wanted to create something that was equally as compelling. What we've come up with is what we are currently calling "Custom Combat". It allows a server to select a list of maps and change what vehicles appear in those maps and which classes will be included or excluded from competing. The server can even exclude certain weapons. This allows players to set up "Sniper Only" servers. Heck, it can be a battle of engineers armed solely with wrenches if the server so wishes it.

Which battles from the conflict are you representing in your maps? How many maps are you looking to have out of the box, and will they be larger than those appearing in BF 1942?

Marini: We are finalising the conflicts at this time. We are definitely including a city battle in Hue and the Siege of Khe Sahn. The total number of maps has yet to be finalised, but we should be in or around the same number as with BF 1942.

It terms of map size, we are more focused on quality battles rather than expansive ones. As in 1942, the maps will range from large to small, but the goal is to make sure we use the space in a manner that is most fun for the player.

When it comes to nations, we are really focusing all our efforts on the U.S. and the N.V.A. Within those nations are sub-forces like the Green Berets and the Viet Cong.

Have you considered having any kind of proper campaign structure in multiplayer, with battles progressing over a defined set of maps?

Marini: We have thought of it, but it can't be too elaborate. The beauty of BF is that you can play for five minute or five hours. It's all under your control. With a multiplayer campaign, we would be asking the player to commit a huge amount of time to the campaign with specific time schedules. Although this may be feasible for some, I fear it isn't feasible for many, including myself.

That being said, we are considering a multiplayer mode that will allow participants to battle on a map and then continue the battle on an evolved version of that map. It isn't as grand a concept as a multiplayer campaign, but it does allow for a war to be carried from one map to the next.

Napalm, flamethrowers, red smoke to mark pickup points - will we get all this. And generally, what weapons and vehicles are you planning to include for each of the forces represented?

Marini: Napalm and smoke markers will be included in the game. Flamethrowers were considered but we felt they weren't as compelling in the virtual world as compared to their real life counterparts.

As far as what weapons and vehicles we plan, that is a large list. On the weapons front we are allowing each class the option to select from one of two kits specific to that class. On the vehicle front, both nations will have a compliment of tanks, fighters, helicopters, and other assorted people movers.

Can you, at this time, tell us anything more about your plans for player classes and the types of load-outs we can expect for these?

Marini: One thing we really wanted to achieve was balance without symmetry. We really wanted the U.S. force to be different from the N.V.A. force so that the way a player approached the battle was different based on the side they played on.

As I mentioned, each class has a choice of two kits specific to that class. For instance, a U.S. Assault might be equipped with an M16 kit or an M60 kit. Sure, he may have more firepower with the M60, but he'll have more accuracy with the M16, plus he can carry hand grenades. We are still in the process of balancing all these selections out so when we finalise the feature, I can reveal more.

Are you making any improvements to the game engine? If so, could you tell us about these and how they directly impact gameplay?

Marini: The most obvious improvement is in the graphics engine. We are supporting normal mapping, specular lighting, basically all the new bells and whistles that we need to remain on top of the heap in terms of graphics.

The biggest impact is in the immersion. You don't look at the game and say "nice model" or "nice texture". It's so good that you don't even realise what's happening. You can even make out every groove in the tread of your team-mate's combat boot as you follow him through the tall grass. It all looks so natural you forget you're playing a game

In terms of multiplayer, are we still looking at a maximum of 64 players per server, or are you toying with attempting to increase this number?

One hundred billion players - muhhhahahaha.

But seriously, we are still set at a maximum of 64 players. Although 64-player maps are fairly common in BF 1942, many servers run with less than that. 40-player servers and 32-player servers are very common. Based on that information we decided that this was not the time to increase the upper limit.

With BF Vietnam, we hope to increase the user base. If that increases the demand for battles on a larger scale, we will of course try and accommodate that. I would love to see battles with hundreds of people involved.

When Battlefield Vietnam is released, can we expect to see the same sort of support for it that you've given BF 1942? And will you continue to support BF 1942 once Vietnam is out?

Marini: The current plan is to continue supporting BF 1942 with free content and performance upgrades. As was the case with BF 1942, we don't want to count our chickens before they are hatched so we have not discussed the next step for BF Vietnam. We are all focused on releasing a game that is at least as good of an experience as BF 1942 was when it was released.

Finally, what's your one favourite part of, or experience with, Battlefield Vietnam so far, and why?

Marini: My favourite experience is when people see it for the first time. It is really early and unfinished, but it shows a lot of potential. Recently we were at Camp EA [EA's own tradeshow event in the States] and this time was the first time we showed our game to a collection of media outlets.

I was really nervous because we had to meet such high expectations. I loved what we had done, but I was unsure how the media would react. When we unveiled it, the media loved it. They were very impressed and I was very proud. It's nice to see people appreciate the hard work we've done here at the studio.

07-29-2003, 08:31 PM	#1 (permalink)
SRP Private Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 49	Battlefield Vietnam Interview The folowing is an article from PC Zone www.pczone.co.uk Digital Illusions takes us on a tour of the successor to its smash hit PC game Battlefield 1942 17:52 Having struck the right chord with PC gamers with a penchant for multiplayer action with its World War II-themed title Battlefield 1942, developer Digital Illusions - well, subsidiary Digital Illusions Canada to be precise - is gearing up to delight us once again with 1942's full-blown sequel: Battlefield Vietnam. Retaining Battlefield 1942's highly successful core gameplay and Hollywood-esque action and upping the ante with plenty of new features and engine enhancements, Battlefield Vietnam finds players fighting for either US or NVA and Vietcong forces and combating in representations of some of the conflict's most fierce battles. Sounds good? Oh yes. Battlefield Vietnam producer A.J. Marini recently took a time-out from a busy schedule to tell us more about what's coming. Why the Vietnam War as the setting for the Battlefield sequel? Marini: When you set out to base your game on real wars, you only have a limited selection. With World War II having been so popular for so long, developers are looking for something different. When looking at interesting theatres of battle, the Vietnam War is next on the list after World War II. It was a war with a lot of controversy. Also, it was a war that changed the way wars are waged. It isn't the big lumbering war that World War II was. It's a more dynamic and faster-paced war. As with BF 1942, we're looking at both a single-player and multiplayer experience. BF 1942 proved to be a better multiplayer than single-player game. Will you be looking to improve heavily on single-player for Vietnam? Marini: Yes, we are looking at improving the single-player experience. Battlefield is really a multiplayer game at its core so the single-player experience will still be built on the multiplayer concept rather than a story-driven approach. There are many alterations being discussed at this time but nothing has been finalised other than the need to improve upon it. Although the basic premise seems to be the same as BF 1942 - infantry combat and vehicle use and combat - we expect the gameplay to be somewhat different due to the nature of the technology (Huey helicopters, for example) that's present. Can you tell us about how this technology will provide us with a different playing experience? Marini: The way a battle is fought is really dependent on the tools at hand. This is true in reality and in Battlefield. In World War II, the vehicles were slower-paced. In Vietnam, the vehicles are faster, more manoeuvrable, and in the case of the helicopter, more versatile. This speed and versatility makes the battle more dynamic. The pilots can react to changes in the battle much faster than they did in BF 1942. The terrain plays a big part as well. In BF 1942, the terrain was very wide open. In Vietnam, the terrain is still open, but there is a lot of vegetation around. This means that rather than hiding in buildings, your enemy can be hiding almost anywhere. Two new gameplay elements that we've read about is lifting vehicles with helicopters and being able to shoot from vehicles. Could you go into these features in a little more detail, explaining how they impact overall gameplay? Marini: Being able to shoot from a passenger position has been a big addition. Rather than being a passive passenger, you can now affect change in the battle. It allows for unique approaches to situations. Granted, firing a gun from a passenger position may not seem like a big deal, but dropping mines from a hovering helicopter directly into the path of an enemy tank is quite unique. In general, the feature is yet another avenue of gameplay for the players to explore. The airlifting is another area that will intrigue players. Basically, the helicopters can hover over a vehicle and lift it away to another location. It means that a vehicle like a tank can be moved to a location on the other end of the map in a fraction of the time that it would have taken if it were to travel on its own. Of course, these vehicles need not be empty. They can be fully loaded with personnel prior to take off. That relocated tank can be firing shells at the opposing team whilst in mid flight. What other major, core new gameplay features are you introducing to the series in Battlefield Vietnam that you haven't talked about above? For example, what new modes of play do you have up your sleeve? Marini: For the basic game, we wanted to increase teamplay without sacrificing the ability for a single player to affect change. The most significant step made in this direction is in the way control points change hands. In 1942, a single player could easily and rapidly change control points. The number of players at the point had no bearing on the way control points changed hands. In Vietnam, the control points will take longer to change hands but the more team members you have at a control point, the faster it changes. In other words, if it takes a single player four minutes to change a flag, two players can do it in two minutes, four players can do it in one minute, and so on. This encourages teamplay without forcing it on anyone. For the multiplayer modes, Conquest is king and we wanted to create something that was equally as compelling. What we've come up with is what we are currently calling "Custom Combat". It allows a server to select a list of maps and change what vehicles appear in those maps and which classes will be included or excluded from competing. The server can even exclude certain weapons. This allows players to set up "Sniper Only" servers. Heck, it can be a battle of engineers armed solely with wrenches if the server so wishes it. Which battles from the conflict are you representing in your maps? How many maps are you looking to have out of the box, and will they be larger than those appearing in BF 1942? Marini: We are finalising the conflicts at this time. We are definitely including a city battle in Hue and the Siege of Khe Sahn. The total number of maps has yet to be finalised, but we should be in or around the same number as with BF 1942. It terms of map size, we are more focused on quality battles rather than expansive ones. As in 1942, the maps will range from large to small, but the goal is to make sure we use the space in a manner that is most fun for the player. When it comes to nations, we are really focusing all our efforts on the U.S. and the N.V.A. Within those nations are sub-forces like the Green Berets and the Viet Cong. Have you considered having any kind of proper campaign structure in multiplayer, with battles progressing over a defined set of maps? Marini: We have thought of it, but it can't be too elaborate. The beauty of BF is that you can play for five minute or five hours. It's all under your control. With a multiplayer campaign, we would be asking the player to commit a huge amount of time to the campaign with specific time schedules. Although this may be feasible for some, I fear it isn't feasible for many, including myself. That being said, we are considering a multiplayer mode that will allow participants to battle on a map and then continue the battle on an evolved version of that map. It isn't as grand a concept as a multiplayer campaign, but it does allow for a war to be carried from one map to the next. Napalm, flamethrowers, red smoke to mark pickup points - will we get all this. And generally, what weapons and vehicles are you planning to include for each of the forces represented? Marini: Napalm and smoke markers will be included in the game. Flamethrowers were considered but we felt they weren't as compelling in the virtual world as compared to their real life counterparts. As far as what weapons and vehicles we plan, that is a large list. On the weapons front we are allowing each class the option to select from one of two kits specific to that class. On the vehicle front, both nations will have a compliment of tanks, fighters, helicopters, and other assorted people movers. Can you, at this time, tell us anything more about your plans for player classes and the types of load-outs we can expect for these? Marini: One thing we really wanted to achieve was balance without symmetry. We really wanted the U.S. force to be different from the N.V.A. force so that the way a player approached the battle was different based on the side they played on. As I mentioned, each class has a choice of two kits specific to that class. For instance, a U.S. Assault might be equipped with an M16 kit or an M60 kit. Sure, he may have more firepower with the M60, but he'll have more accuracy with the M16, plus he can carry hand grenades. We are still in the process of balancing all these selections out so when we finalise the feature, I can reveal more. Are you making any improvements to the game engine? If so, could you tell us about these and how they directly impact gameplay? Marini: The most obvious improvement is in the graphics engine. We are supporting normal mapping, specular lighting, basically all the new bells and whistles that we need to remain on top of the heap in terms of graphics. The biggest impact is in the immersion. You don't look at the game and say "nice model" or "nice texture". It's so good that you don't even realise what's happening. You can even make out every groove in the tread of your team-mate's combat boot as you follow him through the tall grass. It all looks so natural you forget you're playing a game In terms of multiplayer, are we still looking at a maximum of 64 players per server, or are you toying with attempting to increase this number? One hundred billion players - muhhhahahaha. But seriously, we are still set at a maximum of 64 players. Although 64-player maps are fairly common in BF 1942, many servers run with less than that. 40-player servers and 32-player servers are very common. Based on that information we decided that this was not the time to increase the upper limit. With BF Vietnam, we hope to increase the user base. If that increases the demand for battles on a larger scale, we will of course try and accommodate that. I would love to see battles with hundreds of people involved. When Battlefield Vietnam is released, can we expect to see the same sort of support for it that you've given BF 1942? And will you continue to support BF 1942 once Vietnam is out? Marini: The current plan is to continue supporting BF 1942 with free content and performance upgrades. As was the case with BF 1942, we don't want to count our chickens before they are hatched so we have not discussed the next step for BF Vietnam. We are all focused on releasing a game that is at least as good of an experience as BF 1942 was when it was released. Finally, what's your one favourite part of, or experience with, Battlefield Vietnam so far, and why? Marini: My favourite experience is when people see it for the first time. It is really early and unfinished, but it shows a lot of potential. Recently we were at Camp EA [EA's own tradeshow event in the States] and this time was the first time we showed our game to a collection of media outlets. I was really nervous because we had to meet such high expectations. I loved what we had done, but I was unsure how the media would react. When we unveiled it, the media loved it. They were very impressed and I was very proud. It's nice to see people appreciate the hard work we've done here at the studio.