boranchistanger Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 You may think I'm crazy but at the rate it is going I think this game will become good yet not great. Games come and go yet some of them come and stay. Look at some classics: Tetris, Pac Man, Space Invadors, Doom, Command and Conquer, Zelda, Poke'mon and more recently, Medieval Total War and Battlefield 1942 along with quite a few others. So what made these games "great?" They were innovative, fun, addicting, interesting, hard yet not to hard. They all had these qualities. Battlield 1942 is the greatest first person multiplayer game ever created. There are millions still playing it. Tetris is arguably the most addicting game ever created and was the foundation for every puzzle game for any video game system. Zelda is worshipped by millions along with Poke'mon. There are many other games that come close to being "great." Falcon 4.0 was a highly innovative airial warplane game with some kick butt multiplayer. It wasn't great though. It will not be remembered by the next generation like Pac Man and Space Invaders are to this generation. Same with Jedi Outcast, the Sims, Medal of Honor, Wolfenstein and countless others. They are all "good" games, but none of them "great." So how will Battlefront turn out? Will it be another Galaxies? Gigantic hype before the release of the game with massive dissapointment once the game is released? Will it be like Age of Empires, a game which didn't quite reach the high expectations set forth for it? Or will Battlefront be like its predacessor Battlefield 1942? Will Battlefront have that innovative game style which Battlefield 1942 brought to the table? Will Battlefront be as addicting to play as a Tetris? Will Battlefront be as fun as Pac Man was to the former generation? I really don't think so. Battlefront will be a good game, I can assure you of that, but it will not be a "great" game. It will be fun, I mean Battlefield 1942 was fun. Battlefront will last many years and will be played with by millions. The game though brings nothing as radical and as dynamic to the table as the "great" games did. Its multiplayer will indeed be tremendously fun, however will it bring that same excitement and fun when it first comes out that Battlefield 1942 did? Battlefront just isn't showing anything innovative right now that will totally knock your socks off like Battlefield 1942's unbelievable multiplayer did. It doesn't appear to be a completely new revolutionary style of gaming like what Command and Conquer was. Battlefront will be a good game, a game that will be fun for a very long time, but it does not appear like it will be "great." I could be wrong though. Peace -Boran Chistanger Co-Leader of the IEF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idei Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by boranchistanger Battlield 1942 is the greatest first person multiplayer game ever created. There are millions still playing it. that is your opinion. Counterstrike is still the most popular first person shooter ever created. More people are online playing Counter-Strike at any given time than most other FPS shooters combined. Or will Battlefront be like its predacessor Battlefield 1942? Battefront was being developed at the same time as Battlefield 1942. They may be compared, but Battlefront is built on a separate engine than Battlefield 1942. Battlefront just isn't showing anything innovative right now that will totally knock your socks off like Battlefield 1942's unbelievable multiplayer did. It doesn't appear to be a completely new revolutionary style of gaming like what Command and Conquer was. Battlefront will be a good game, a game that will be fun for a very long time, but it does not appear like it will be "great." I could be wrong though. Peace -Boran Chistanger Co-Leader of the IEF Read my assertions above. Battlefield is popular, but far from the stellar game that Boran Chistanger is claiming it to be. If Battlefront creates a believable Star Wars experience that in itself would be an accomplishment. A game that translates the atmosphere of a movie well is worth consideration. Having innovative features is only part of what makes a game great. Games like Tribes have achieved success due to their great player communities. Others like Half-Life have great mod communities. I should note that they are both FPS games. There are many factors that need consideration before making a statement about a game's place in history. At this point the game is still in development. What's been released sounds exciting enough to want to play. As far as debating it's place in history, that seems a bit early. Idei Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzyfreaker Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I don't think this game will go down in gaming history. Lucasarts History maybe, Star Wars History maybe. But not gaming history. oh and you forgot GTA, that's down in history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountainforest Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I kind of agree with Boran. Lucasarts will probably never make a great game, as those games are risky to make. It costs a lot and you never know how it turns out. That's why all lucasarts games are based on other succesfull games. Age of Empires, Quake, and no Battlefield 1942. If there is a succesful game, Lucasarts will come with a Starwars version. I don't say this is a bad thing, it's fun to play a good game so it's surdenly fun to play a clone of that game in Starwars style. I'm only saying that Lucasarts will probably never come with a original game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyler_Durden Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I gotta be honest here. Luca$art$ has not been known, recently, anyway for being really innovative in terms of games. Sure they have had some great games in terms of gamplay but as far as bringing something new to the table, i think they have failed in that regard. I believe their last real innovative game was JK back in 97, which brought the arrival of the best weapon ever, the lightsaber. I think, though, that Luca$art$ has a real winner here, while not, innovative in terms of gameplay but by taking a formula and making it better. If that's innovation, ok, cool. All i know is, is that the game is shaping up to be one of the best ever in terms of star wars, or even fps. Plus the fact that there will be TONS of mods to add to replay, it looks like it will be around for years to come if the core gameplay is good. I wish, though that they could apply some real innovation to their jedi knight series, that game needs a makeover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Oh FFS didn't we have enough of those blasted threads? Every n00b that comes to this forum goes "Will this game be good?" "Will this game be special?" STFUplzkthxbye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaebginn Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Who cares? I dont crae if my grandid wants to play it, I just want me to play it now and enjoy it. It wont be great. only the real old games are legends. At least SNES old, even older. No modern game is great. Myabe with the exception of goldeneye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master William Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Well, most SW games never reach very high popularity... it's always the attention whores like UT2004 or Half-Life, or the really crappy game Counter-Strike. I do hope Battlefront makes it and becomes real popular and is not ruined like JA and JO was with the "saber off = peace/no force u noob" stupid rules. Battlefront will deliver a very good SW experience, and I know a lot of people like to play wars and stuff like that, when I had SWG everyone wanted to have huge wars and cool battles, but in the end it turned out lame, because that is what SWG is. So I'm pretty sure that if they advertise Battlefront real good and have people from all over the world play it, it'll turn out fine. It needs a good reputation as well. Though the thing is, not everyone likes Star Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by Master William Well, most SW games never reach very high popularity... it's always the attention whores like UT2004 or Half-Life, or the really crappy game Counter-Strike. I do hope Battlefront makes it and becomes real popular and is not ruined like JA and JO was with the "saber off = peace/no force u noob" stupid rules. Battlefront will deliver a very good SW experience, and I know a lot of people like to play wars and stuff like that, when I had SWG everyone wanted to have huge wars and cool battles, but in the end it turned out lame, because that is what SWG is. So I'm pretty sure that if they advertise Battlefront real good and have people from all over the world play it, it'll turn out fine. It needs a good reputation as well. Though the thing is, not everyone likes Star Wars. JA nad JO are among the most popular net games (once JO now JA) and has probably the biggest modding community (once JO now JA), so they were a success. The rest of the games were more for the Star Wars fans. SWG is indeed a very sad case, I played it for 4 days before dropping it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonepadawan Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Age of Empires? Not reaching expectations? What on earth are you drivelling about? Loads of people still play Age of Empires 2. The community is still going strong with about 5 tournaments being played and lots of mods coming out for it... You didn't mention starcraft either. A pretty old game that is still going strong. I agree with Tfighterpilot, please go and wait for the game before making your points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master William Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Originally posted by yaebginn Myabe with the exception of goldeneye. Goldeneye is atleast 4 years old, I wouldn't call that modern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaebginn Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 in comparrison to thirty years old, its fairly modern Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master William Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 But I could call a 50-year old car "modern" just because I compared it to a 200-year old skeleton. Gaming wise, Goldeneye is viewed upon as retro, which means it's old. It's been 5 years or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yaebginn Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Goldeneye lives on. I guess its a matter of opinion as to what is old to what. IMO, its not old. I still play it every day and plan on getting a new N64 and new game as a backup. To you, you may have moved on to Everything or Nothing and whatever Bond game was before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Hello? Knights of the Old Republic? Star Wars game that's already in history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tFighterPilot Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad Hello? Knights of the Old Republic? Star Wars game that's already in history? Just drop it, nothing in this thread makes sense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master William Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 yes, you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by boranchistanger Or will Battlefront be like its predacessor Battlefield 1942? From the interviews I've seen from devlopers, Battlefront is a lot more like Halo than BF1942... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idei Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by Master William Well, most SW games never reach very high popularity... it's always the attention whores like UT2004 or Half-Life, or the really crappy game Counter-Strike. Only posters that can't play CounterStrike write about it that way. It is one of the most popular games on the net and there is a reason people like it. If SWBF can create a game experience that makes a player feel like they were in a scene from one of the movies, that would be enough in my book to consider it a success. Debating the significance of SWBF in the gaming community just seems without merit at this point. Once the game goes retail everything will be different. Example: People talked about half-life for years, even after it was delayed several times, but the success and popularity of half-life was well beyond people's expectations. Half-Life was one of the earliest games that allowed mods. The first successful mod in the gaming community was called Counter-Strike. The whole idea of allowing players to modify a game was ahead of its time, but Valve Software worked closely with the mod community and helped CS rise into the professional gaming superstar that it is. There has yet to be a game based upon a movie that successfully transitions players between the movie and the game. The last one I could remember was X-Wing on the PC. That game made players feel like they were in an X-Wing, in the SW universe. It was so successful at creating the X-Wing experience that it led to many sequels. Today's Rogue Squadron games all came about based upon the success of the original X-Wing, but somewhere between X-Wing and Rogue Squadron the realism of the X-Wing days was turned more into an arcade action game. Only time will tell whether a game has any real value to the gaming community. Speculating may be fun, but without a retail product it just seems too early. Idei Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boranchistanger Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 that is your opinion. Counterstrike is still the most popular first person shooter ever created. More people are online playing Counter-Strike at any given time than most other FPS shooters combined. Of course counterstrike is an awesome game and is a great game. I didn't put down every "great" game out there, just enough to get my point accross. Battefront was being developed at the same time as Battlefield 1942. They may be compared, but Battlefront is built on a separate engine than Battlefield 1942. The games are going to be incrediably similar. Battlefront is going to adopt Battlefield unique conquest mode and Battlefront itself was inspired by Battlefield. Battlefield is popular, but far from the stellar game that Boran Chistanger is claiming it to be. Popular? I got on today and there were over 3 million playing, at 5 in the morning! And the game is over 2 years old now and has expansions plus a sequal. The point is that Battlefield revolutionized multiplayer and is being hailed by many as the greatest multiplayer game ever. If Battlefront creates a believable Star Wars experience that in itself would be an accomplishment. A game that translates the atmosphere of a movie well is worth consideration. Having innovative features is only part of what makes a game great. Agreed that innovation is only one thing that can make a game great. Don't know about capturing the movies though. I kind of agree with Boran. Lucasarts will probably never make a great game, as those games are risky to make. It costs a lot and you never know how it turns out. That's why all lucasarts games are based on other succesfull games. Age of Empires, Quake, and no Battlefield 1942. If there is a succesful game, Lucasarts will come with a Starwars version. Agreed. Lucasarts always bases their games off of others which really prevents their games from becoming great. Jedi Knight was the only time that Lucasarts really did something innovative and new which would constitute being a great game. I think the origional Jedi Knight game was great. Luca$art$ That sums that company up right there. Milk Star Wars for all its worth, and then some (Cough Jedi Academy cough) Age of Empires? Not reaching expectations? What on earth are you drivelling about? Loads of people still play Age of Empires 2. The community is still going strong with about 5 tournaments being played and lots of mods coming out for it... It was a major dissapointment. Believe me, I know. I looked forward for that game for so long and it turned out to be an ancient Command and Conquer with crappy graphics. Gamespot summed it up best: "This is not quite the game you hoped for. Even worse, it has some definite problems." I love the games however they are not great. You didn't mention starcraft either. A pretty old game that is still going strong. I didn't mention a lot of them. Yes, Starcraft is in the COmmand and Conquer calliber. Hello? Knights of the Old Republic? Star Wars game that's already in history? From the interviews I've seen from devlopers, Battlefront is a lot more like Halo than BF1942... Are you two feeling OK? I thought, along with many many others, that Knights of the Old Republic was a huge dissapointment. The story was pretty good though, but nothing great about it. And Battlefront is a Star Wars version of Battlefield 1942, just look at the two. Common soldier, similar engine, similar multiplayer, same capacity of players. The only huge difference is Battlefront's single player and the hopeful utility that will allow PS2 players to play with PC players. Only time will tell whether a game has any real value to the gaming community. Speculating may be fun, but without a retail product it just seems too early. Perhaps if I had posted this a month ago. However now we pretty much understand what the game will be like. All that remains are the specifics. -Boran Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idei Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by boranchistanger Popular? I got on today and there were over 3 million playing, at 5 in the morning! And the game is over 2 years old now and has expansions plus a sequal. The point is that Battlefield revolutionized multiplayer and is being hailed by many as the greatest multiplayer game ever. Spoken like a true BF1942 fan. Battlefield lacks a sense of realism that will prevent it from ever being played at the professional level. There are so many better WWII games. Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, Wolfenstein are all better WWII games. None of the major recognized tournaments recognize BF1942 as professional calibre. Check out World Cyber Games and The Cyber Professional League, two of the biggest professional organizations, and you will know what i'm talking about. I just checked Gamespay Arcade, a major serverlist, and it listed just under 4600 players on BF1942. Counterstrike listed 75000, and that doesn't include their Steam network that currently hosts most CS games. Perhaps if I had posted this a month ago. However now we pretty much understand what the game will be like. All that remains are the specifics. -Boran Boran you've missed my point entirely. Saying that all that remains are the specifics is like saying there is a global war on terrorism. All that remains are the specifics. People speculated for years about the merits of Half-Life and guess what. None of them ever predicted or debated the emergence of CounterStrike. None of them predicted the huge popularity or longevity of the game. Today, people will tell you that Half-Life is a milestone in gaming. Back then, it was just another FPS in the works. Put aside the comparisons to BF1942 until the game goes retail. I believe the game will be better than you expect. Idei Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by boranchistanger Are you two feeling OK? I thought, along with many many others, that Knights of the Old Republic was a huge dissapointment. The story was pretty good though, but nothing great about it. Who are these many many others? You certainly don't seem to be the majority. From what I have seen on various boards KOTOR seems to be almost universily loved. Certainly there is a big pile of awards reflecting that... Game of the Year Awards 2004 Game Developers' Conference - Game Developers Choice Awards Game of the Year British Academy of Film and Television Arts Best Xbox Game of the Year Computer Games Magazine Game of the Year The Space Channel - 2nd Annual Space Awards Game of the Year Computer Gaming World Game of the Year PC Gamer Game of the Year Official XBox Magazine Game of the Year 1Up.com Game of the Year IGN Overall Game of the Year IGN Xbox Game of the Year IGN PC Game of the Year GameSpot Best Xbox Game of the Year GameSpot Readers' Choice - Xbox Game of the Year GameSpy Game of the Year GameSpy Xbox Game of the Year GameSpy Gamer's Choice Xbox Game of the Year CNN.com Top Gaming Title of 2003 Amazon.com Game of the Year Amazon.com Xbox Game of the Year Gamefly Favorite Game of 2003 Gamefly Best XBox Game of 2003 Golden Joystick Awards Xbox Game of the Year Atomic 2003 Reader Awards Xbox Game of the Year Golden Joystick Awards Ultimate Game of the Year - Finalist Games Domain Game of the Year TeamXbox Reader's Choice: Game of the Year International Press Academy Satellite Awards Outstanding Execution of a Gaming Concept - Game of the Year Nominee TechTV's X-Play Best Game of 2003 Maximum PC Single Player Game of the Year RPG Vault Game of the Year San Francisco Chronicle Best of 2003 DailyGame Best Overall Game of 2003 Marin Independent Journal Game of the Year Pittsburgh Tribune Review Game of the Year Cinescape Xbox Game of the Year Extreme Gamer Game of the Year Console Gold Game of the Year Console Gold Xbox Game of the Year Game Revolution Game of the Year GameZone Xbox Game of the Year GameZone Reader's Choice of 2003: Xbox GameZone PC Game of the Year Netjak Best Overall Game of 2003 TeamXbox Staff's Picks: Game of the Year Electronic Playground - EP Blister 2003 Awards XBox Exclusive Game of the Year Electronic Playground - EP Blister 2003 Awards Best Canadian PC Game of the Year RPG of the Year Awards Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences Computer RPG of the Year Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences Console RPG of the Year Computer Gaming World RPG of the Year Official XBox Magazine RPG of the Year 1Up.com Best Roleplaying Game IGN Best Xbox RPG IGN Best PC RPG GameSpot Best Roleplaying Game of the Year GameSpot Readers' Choice - Best PC Role-Playing Game GameSpot Readers' Choice - Best Xbox Role-Playing Game GameSpy Xbox RPG of the Year GameSpy PC RPG of the Year GameSpy Gamer's Choice PC RPG of the Year RPG Vault RPG of the Year Electronic Playground - EP Blister 2003 Awards Best RPG for PC Electronic Playground - EP Blister 2003 Awards Best Console RPG Gamefly Best RPG Action Adventure Game Gullstikka (Norway) Best RPG of the Year Spike TV's Video Game Awards Best Fantasy Game TechTV's X-Play Best Roleplaying Game TeamXbox Reader's Choice: Best Role Playing Game Game Revolution RPG of the Year Lost Library Editor's Choice: RPG of the Year Shacknews Reader's Choice: Xbox RPG of the Year Shacknews Reader's Choice: PC RPG of the Year DailyGame Best RPG of 2003 RPGFan RPG of the Year Console Gold Role-Playing Game of the Year Extreme Gamer RPG of the Year XGR Best RPG of 2003 GameZone Best Role-Playing Game: PC Netjak Best Role Playing Game Game of 2003 Other Awards 2004 Nexus Award Best Fantasy Videogame 2004 Game Developers' Conference - Game Developers Choice Awards Best Writing 2004 Game Developers' Conference - Game Developers Choice Awards Best Character (HK-47) Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences Achievement in Character or Story Development Computer Gaming World NPC of the Year - HK-47 IGN Best Xbox Sound IGN Best PC Story GameSpy Best Music: PC GameSpot Best Game Based on a TV or Film Property International Press Academy Satellite Awards Most Innovative Story Design Nominee RPG Vault Outstanding Achievement in Writing RPG Vault Outstanding Achievement in Music RPG Vault Outstanding Achievement in Sound RPG Vault Outstanding Achievement in Voice Acting TeamXbox Reader's Choice: Breakthrough Title RPGDot Best Graphics in an RPG RPGDot Best Sound in an RPG GameSpot Xbox Game of the Month: July IGN.COM Xbox Game of the Month: July IGN PC PC Game of the Month: November Games Domain Top Game Award (Xbox) Games Domain Top Game Award (PC) Gamer's Hell Gold Hell Award (Xbox) Gamer's Hell Gold Hell Award (PC) Adrenaline Vault Seal of Excellence Loaded Inc Hot Property Award DailyGame Best Time Suck IGNPC Best RPG of E3 2003 (Runner Up) Game Critics Awards Best RPG of E3 (nominee) Game Revolution Best RPG of E3 2003 Just RPG Best XBox RPG of E3 2003 Next Gen Magazine top 10 best games of E3 2001 Womengamers Best Debut of E3 2001 GameSpot Editor’s Choice at E3 2001 Voodoo Extreme Best of E3 Award 2001 Editor's Choice Awards GameSpot Editor's Choice Award IGN.COM Editor's Choice Award (Xbox) IGN.COM Editor's Choice Award (PC) GameSpy Editor's Choice Award TeamXbox Editor's Choice Award WorthPlaying Editor's Choice Award netjak Editor's Choice Award ZTGameDomain Editor's Choice Award GD Xbox Editor's Choice Drool Award Gaming Nexus Editor's Choice Award ActionTrip Editor's Choice Award You may have been disappointed, but I hardly think many people agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Thanks Prime. No one insult KotoR like that! Idei- There is something I don't understand. How can you say that Wolfenstein, Medal of Honor and Call of Duty are professional level FPS(if you're talking about MP that is)? Their MP aren't that great(except for RtCW which was based on teamplay). The others are all death match and fragfest. I suppose that's what they consider "professionnal". There are many factors that gives Counter Strike an everlasting longetivity one of them being its low requirements. I believe that's why that game still lasts. As for checking how many players play BF1942 on Gamespy Arcade, I suggest you check a better place like the in-game browser. Gamespy Arcade doesn't show all the servers and players playing BF1942 and its mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Idei Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad Thanks Prime. No one insult KotoR like that! Idei- There is something I don't understand. How can you say that Wolfenstein, Medal of Honor and Call of Duty are professional level FPS(if you're talking about MP that is)? Their MP aren't that great(except for RtCW which was based on teamplay). The others are all death match and fragfest. I suppose that's what they consider "professionnal". What I said was the following: 1) BF1942 lacks a sense of realism in gameplay that prevents it from being professional calibre. 2) There are better WWII games than BF1942. Examples would include Call of Duty, Medal of Honor, and Wolfenstein. All which provide a better WWII gameplay experience than BF1942. There are many factors that gives Counter Strike an everlasting longetivity one of them being its low requirements. I believe that's why that game still lasts. That is a good point; however I met many tournament level players in Counterstrike indicating to me that besides the lower requirements, there are still many highly skilled competitive players that play the game. As for checking how many players play BF1942 on Gamespy Arcade, I suggest you check a better place like the in-game browser. Gamespy Arcade doesn't show all the servers and players playing BF1942 and its mods. At it's peak during the past 48 hours on Steam, there were 114,501 players on the Steam network. Steam is the official network of Valve Software. Ea.com reports BF1942 players at 5,792 players. Sheer statistics aside, CS is the only officially support multiplayer games in many professional tournament events. BF1942 has yet to achieve this milestone. What is your point lukeiamyourdad? My facts are valid and verified. twice. Idei Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukeiamyourdad Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I had no real points. Merely comments. Hmmm weird...I feel that Wolfenstein lacks more realism then BF1942. However, in BF1942's defense, it's pretty hard to have a good solid WWII experience when the game is mostly for MP. Sacrifices are made for balance and gameplay. Such factors can indeed kill realism. Though I'll have to agree that it ain't the best WWII experience. Hmmm...EA doesn't seem to verify very well. Last time I saw 10 000 BF1942 players online. But oh well... Haven't played CS in a long time...is there still as many hacks and cheats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.