Comments on: Battlefield Heroes

By: David Russell

David Russell — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:17:16 +0000

Enemy Territory is not the same. Enemy Territory was originally supposed to be a paid expansion to RtCW, but they couldn’t get singleplayer working so they released their multiplayer code as freeware.

The difference between ET and BFH is that the latter is designed as a full game. Whereas ET was released free because the publishers pulled the plug on development, BFH has been developed from the beginning to be free-of-charge, and make money through advertising. That’s why it’s revolutionary, not the fact that it’s a shooter game you don’t have to pay for, which is not remotely original as you pointed out.

By: Paul

Paul — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:24:43 +0000

So you mean the concept of a free download-able online game is original? Two words - Enemy Territory.

By: PacManiac

PacManiac — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 11:46:44 +0000

I did this first too - smells a bit too much of TF2 for my liking I thought. But TF2 stole more from Incredibles than EA from TF2 I’d say… A bit silly anyway, just cause TF2 did it really well, now every FPS with a bit of cartoony design will be a TF2 thief. Nothing’s truly original these days, Heroes seem to be as original as it gets really, all facts considered.

It’s not even been stated Heroes is an FPS (could be 3rd person), so Colin’s argument goes down to the fact that TF2 and Heroes looked at the same source - Incredibles (or 60’s cartoon style for that matter) - for the design of one of the characters’ head? Hardly same as saying EA wants a bit of TF2’s rather large cake. I’m not sure about EA’s design anyway, the head seems to have a different style than the body..

So games have been released for free before (you forgot America’s Army).. this is something else, releasing it with the use of adverts. That could mean a continued, and better, support of the game which to me is really great. I played AA longer than anything I’ve played for the last ten years because of that fact. New bits released here and there kept it interesting, and game balance never became an issue for long.

It’s free and as long as I can stomach looking at an advert in the corner of my eye I’ll be fine.. I sit through long adverts staring right at them from my sofa each evening, so I think I can handle that.

By: David Russell

David Russell — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:50:55 +0000

My point was that the concept was original - obviously the gameplay isn’t really (the fact that it says ‘Battlefield’, and there are already games called ‘Battlefield’ is a bit of a giveaway there :P). Oh and the difference between this and TF2 is that the latter isn’t free. I’ve got TF2, and I love it, but it costs money (even though it comes with fewer maps than a lot of open source shooter games) and requires a much higher spec PC than BFH probably will.

By: Colin Riley

Colin Riley — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:14:46 +0000

Your kidding me, right?

“Which makes the subject of this post all the more surprising. EA, normally considered the Barad-dur of the churn-em-out gaming sector, has come up with something truly original.”

EA/DICE are also considered the plagurisers of the gaming sector. Quake Wars is announced, and they instantly release a BF2 mod called ‘2142′ and rush it to market horribly. It’s the same here; all you need to look at is the screenshot page of thier site!

http://battlefield-heroes.com/screenshots.asp

Compare main art with TF2 pic lower middle. Truely original my ass, it’s a poor copy - even the gameplay talk they spout sounds familiar. Free? Free was done with Wolfenstien: Enemy Territory, and that usually beats BF2 in the most-likely-wrong stats listing at gamespy. They are simply running out of ideas again, so taking what is already working for other developers and announcing a huge revolution by taking it as thier own.