Brothers in Arms: Franchise Down

[Baff1 0]

BIA isn't a franchise that I am sad to see go.

[jeza 5416]

Only if you actually wanted that shit :p

I get what your saying there, dont get me wrong i did enjoy GRAW, but i wish it wasnt called graw, just another fps which they made, because GR:desert seige and island thunder, along with r6:roguespear up to ravenshield have been truly great games, shame they stick the r6 or GR name on these current titles BIA included, as clearly they are not true to the originals.

[Baff1 0]

I really enjoyed GRAW. I often play those two titles through again.

It doesn't bother me in the slightest that they called it Ghost Recon. It's clearly targeted at the same audience, so it makes sense to.

Unfortunately the netcode was so unstable that it never cut it in multiplayer.

[ACPL Jon 68]

It's clearly targeted at the same audience

Not quite. The old ones were more mature, more open and slower.

New ones? Nah. The "thx to US dollars" line made me facepalm all day, as well as some other stupid stuff within the story, and also game-mechanics stuff like enemy spawning right behind the corner, "invisible walls" blocking flanking and... stuff. Meh.

But yeah. It's zillion times better then what BiA (inc. HH which was beatiful technologically and story-wise, but sucked at gameplay) and especially R6 (LetDown and Vegas x2), have become.

Kick the ziiip in the balls for such awful trolling! :P

Edited June 19, 2011 by JonPL

[Tonci87 163]

Well it is kind of sad that another originally PC based Series leaves that platform and runs for console dollars

[rundll.exe 12]

Wow, that's insane. I loved BiA while it lasted. There were even some tactical aspects (with limited freedom however) that allowed you to sit behind cover and rethink the situation. And the graphics and gameplay were quite good IMO.

http://xboxmedia.ign.com/xbox/image/article/648/648807/brothers-in-arms-earned-in-blood-20050908031523758_640w.jpg >100kb

RIP for another good game wasted

Edited June 19, 2011 by Alex72
Image size >100kb

[ACPL Jon 68]

Well it is kind of sad that another originally PC based Series leaves that platform and runs for console dollars

Mate, have You actually played any of the BiA's?

Because if You would, You'd be probably frustrated how corridorish was this pseudo-tactical game. How simplified or shallow in few places. How fucked up with very limited FOV a.k.a. console binocular effect. How Your mates came back to live after You finished the mission, how stripped were the controls (same button for reload\interact - WTF! no prone, etc) and options, how simplified was Gfx and how very limited was the field of battle. Plus the enormous HUD.

How can You call a game with only one good way tactical?

Well, let's ask ourselves why was it that way... hmmm... because someone decided it should be out on all platforms and ACCESSIBLE even to the kind called now "CoD kiddies"? And why PC version should be better or upgraded? PC gaming is dying, maaaan.

BiA SHOULD'VE BEEN PC based, it never was (as I'd love it to be), so please.

Want a PC title? Half Life. Men Of War. Flashpoint. These are PC ones, not dumbed down\not limited to fit onto consoles, unlike BiA.

You know what BiA felt like? Like a waste of potential. Hells Highway was just about the same ;\ (at least HH have great story and gfx)

Edited June 19, 2011 by JonPL

[mrcash2009 0]

Ubisoft has cancelled Ghost Recon Future Soldier for PC. I don´t know I should be sad because of this....

Really? :butbut: I know that it went in a direction I didn't like and many others but then to not even support that platform any more, sums it up really.

Obviously the future soldier uses console tech :) Seems the REAL future soldier will be Arma3 on PC then, lets hope that the idea of "Future" and Arma3 will send the GR PC brigade over here to look further.

Sorry off topic.

[max power 21]

Never has something I don't give a shit about filled me with so much anguish.

[celery 8]

Mate, have You actually played any of the BiA's?

Because if You would, You'd be probably frustrated how corridorish was this pseudo-tactical game. How simplified or shallow in few places. How fucked up with very limited FOV a.k.a. console binocular effect. How Your mates came back to live after You finished the mission, how stripped were the controls (same button for reload\interact - WTF! no prone, etc) and options, how simplified was Gfx and how very limited was the field of battle. Plus the enormous HUD.

How can You call a game with only one good way tactical?

Well, let's ask ourselves why was it that way... hmmm... because someone decided it should be out on all platforms and ACCESSIBLE even to the kind called now "CoD kiddies"? And why PC version should be better or upgraded? PC gaming is dying, maaaan.

BiA SHOULD'VE BEEN PC based, it never was (as I'd love it to be), so please.

Want a PC title? Half Life. Men Of War. Flashpoint. These are PC ones, not dumbed down\not limited to fit onto consoles, unlike BiA.

You know what BiA felt like? Like a waste of potential. Hells Highway was just about the same ;\ (at least HH have great story and gfx)

The BiA games are indeed puzzle games in disguise that have little to do with real combat dynamics. However, that is the game's concept. You shouldn't expect them to cater to your own vision of an ideal game.

[ACPL Jon 68]

If they speak about (micro) freedom, "using tactics to survive" and all that "best tactical shooter out there" hype I can have my expectations, right?

This was supposed to kill CoD, which was (especially the second one) ironically much more open and less bullshit (like broken hitboxes or "magic bullet" Springfield) then RtH30. (I can't really speak about EiB, coz' I dropped if pretty fast, 4th mission I think. It was too boring)

I waited for first BiA almost as much as for ArmA 2. Any wonder I was disappointed?

Edited June 19, 2011 by JonPL

[Baff1 0]

BIA is a duff game.

The "puzzle" is a very simple one. Use the supress button. Puzzle solved!

It's a one tactic game set in very limited arena's with very limited differences between each arena or enemy.

With very long and arduous unskippable cut scenes (or when you fianlly can skip..it skips to the next cutscene) making up the bulk of the time spent playing. These cut scenes are offensive drivel. American jingoism at it's worst. An attempt to cash in on a successful TV show, but lacking the depth.

I didn't wait for this game.

I wasn't disappointed.

It was a few hours of fun and if you see it on the shelves for £2.50 it's good value for money.

The gameplay...what little there is of it in each title... is perfectly enjoyable. If childish.

[ricbar89 0]

I loved the first two BIA games, i thought they were great.

It did an amazing job of putting you on the ground in France '44 during the invasion with amazing authenticity, a good amount of realism and great squad controls. It didnt follow the "OMGZ THIS IS SUPER IMPOTANT MISSION ONLY U CAN COMPLET!!" like so many games but allowed you to just follow the story of one sqaud taking part in the invasion, completing missions from the highly famous jump into France to the straight forward advance through France clearing the way, take that building covering the road to that town, clear the streets of this city etc.

Just seems some people want the game to cater to themselves and ignore how good it was in its own right.

[ACPL Jon 68]

Srsly ppl. Learn what a "fact" is. And some facts were really against this game. That's why it's not only mine moaner-ish state of mind.

It was mediocore.

[ricbar89 0]

Srsly ppl. Learn what a "fact" is. And some facts were really against this game. That's why it's not only mine moaner-ish state of mind.

It was mediocore.

Nice logic. Theres negative facts you can point out for every game.

Doesnt make them "mediocore".

Opinions and all that.

[sesdelta38 10]

I don't the series is dead just yet. This game is merely a spin-off, Randy Pitchford said it himself. Gearbox practically made this game as an experiment to see how it would do.

So, we're still gonna see a true BIA sequel, just not right now. Gearbox still wants to continue Baker's story.

Now to be honest, i might get this games, but it doesn't look to interesting to me.

[sic-disaster 311]

So if everybody doesnt buy it, we might be spared from this bullshit in the future.

>Boycot initiated.

[Tonci87 163]

So if everybody doesnt buy it, we might be spared from this bullshit in the future.

>Boycot initiated.

Supporting this^

[sesdelta38 10]

So if everybody doesnt buy it, we might be spared from this bullshit in the future.

>Boycot initiated.

Hopefully. BIA: HH was one the few remotely tactical games that I ever had the pleasure of playing, and I enjoyed playing it a lot.

I hope they come to senses and make a proper sequel. This is just downright disrespectful to the fan base. And it's also somewhat disrespectful to the soldiers who fought in World War 2.

[Baff1 0]

I found the entire series to be massively disrespectful to the soldiers who fought in the war.

The first one made used to make Army Dave livid.

BIA:HH is the one where scores of severed German arms and legs kept bouncing around on the screen.

[Maddmatt 1]

Hopefully. BIA: HH was one the few remotely tactical games that I ever had the pleasure of playing, and I enjoyed playing it a lot.

It was actually pretty dumbed down compared to the earlier ones. Thanks to that stupid 3rd person cover system.

[kernriver 4]

Aaaand another franchise turns retarded. I'm going to meet the CEO of Ubisoft in person, and punch him out.

Someone needs to set up some gravestones outside their HQ in memory of Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, and now BiA.

I just hope they don't decide to make Hidden & dangerous 3 or SWAT 5...:(

[ACPL Jon 68]

Hey. H&D 3 may be good. Made by Czechs, You know...? ;)

[Deadfast 43]

Hey. H&D 3 may be good. Made by Czechs, You know...? ;)

I wouldn't get my hopes up. Illusion Softworks were swallowed up by 2K and Mafia II is a great example of how well that went.

[Tonci87 163]

Oh Yeah, Mafia 2 gets my vote for biggest dissapointment