With Battlefield 1942, developer Dice took multiplayer shooters to a new level in 2002. But while the battlefields might have got bigger since then, their quality hasn’t quite kept up.
«Battlefield 2»: a successful leap into the present
«Battlefield 2142»: bold and futuristic, but not for everyone
«Battlefield: Bad Company»: a company close to my heart
Its successor «Bad Company 2» couldn’t convince me with its campaign, but the multiplayer was still really fun. Especially because the destruction system had been developed further, now allowing you to almost completely raze houses to the ground.
«Battlefield Heroes»: the worst earworm you’ll ever hear
Listen at your own risk.
«Battlefield 3»: the new benchmark
Only Battlelog was horrifying. It was a response to «Call of Duty Elite»: a browser-based solution to join multiplayer matches or start a campaign. Problems with browser compatibility or devil knows what were commonplace.
«Hardline»: a forgettable lowlight in between
«Battlefield 1»: a successful return to the past
… a breath of fresh air that would immediately evaporate. «Battlefield V» returned to the familiar setting of World War II. «Battlefield V» lacked a unique selling point, and was just another shooter in the series without a clear identity. Solid, but nothing special.
«Battlefield 2042»: dead on arrival
After 20 years of ups and downs, «Battlefield» is at a crossroads. Things can’t go on in the same way. Dice should stop aping «Call of Duty» and go back to its own strengths: a solid class system, large dynamic maps, a good balance of foot troops and vehicles – and of course: a destruction system that lives up to its name.
More on games and the tech world every week on the Digitec Podcast.
As a child, I wasn't allowed to have any consoles. It was only with the arrival of the family's 486 PC that the magical world of gaming opened up to me. Today, I'm overcompensating accordingly. Only a lack of time and money prevents me from trying out every game there is and decorating my shelf with rare retro consoles.
Background information
Interesting facts about products, behind-the-scenes looks at manufacturers and deep-dives on interesting people.
From World War I to the future, the «Battlefield» series has fought on numerous fronts. The first skirmish took place 20 years ago. «Battlefield 1942» was released for PC on September 19, 2002. In it, up to 64 players could fight each other on one map. Twice as much as any other shooter at the time. Even more exciting was that you weren’t only on foot, but could use jeeps, tanks, planes and even ships. «Battlefield 1942» was unpredictable, chaotic, full of action and immensely fun. No other shooter offered that much freedom. After nearly ten years of pinball games for the Amiga, some racing titles as well as the game for the movie «Shrek», Swedish development studio Dice succeeded in breaking through with «Battlefield 1942».
Wake Island remains one of the most legendary maps in the series.
Thanks to this success, another studio was founded in Canada, following up on their bombshell with «Battlefield Vietnam» two years later. The game does feel more like an intermediate step. Nevertheless, I’m not the only one who thinks it’s a highlight of the series. Nothing is more fun than racing across the battlefields in a Jeep while Edwin Starr’s «War» plays from the speakers at high volume. No helicopter flight is complete without Richard Wagner’s «Ride of the Valkyries». The fact that every opponent within kilometres knows I’m coming is part of the fun.
In 2005, EA acquired a large percentage of Dice. In the same year, «Battlefield 2» was released, again made in Sweden. While «Call of Duty 2» added to the now oversaturated market of World War II shooters, «Battlefield» swerved into modern conflicts. The result was one of the best «Battlefields» ever. Modern weapons and vehicles sped up the game and provided even more action. Nowhere is this more evident than on the legendary «Strike at Karkand» map. Unlike in «Battlefield 1942» or later games, you’re instantly placed in the middle of the action. A few metres from the spawn point, sparks already fly. There’s a tank lurking behind every jutting wall, wiping out your uncoordinated squad with one shot – survive that, and you run blindly into the sights of the next machine gunner. Often, it’s a case of gritting your teeth, waiting to respawn and going straight back to the front.
No looking both ways at this zebra crossing.
Instead of continuing in the same vein, Dice dared to do something new with «Battlefield 2142», setting it in the future and bringing some fresh ideas to the multiplayer genre. Both teams start in two huge floating motherships. From there, you can catapult out and sometimes even land behind enemy lines. This made the start of any fight much more dynamic. But bases didn’t only serve as starting points, they could also be conquered and blown up. Defending and attacking fortresses became some of the most heated battles in the game. On top of that, there were huge mechs to control. What could be better? Apparently a lot, as «Battlefield 2142» was a financial flop.
Up to this point, «Battlefield» had been a pure multiplayer series. This changed with «Bad Company». As US infantryman Preston Marlowe, you were part of an absolutely chaotic squad, consisting of three lovable stereotypes: loudmouthed explosives expert George Gordon Haggard, overanxious paramedic Terrence Sweetwater and tough leader Samuel D. Redford. As the game progressed, they really grew on you. Missions offered a lot of freedom for the time, and the multiplayer aspect was once again great – especially because you could destroy buildings for the first time. Something that would become a trademark of the series.
As the game was only released for consoles and I don’t like playing first-person shooters with a controller, I felt compelled to buy a special interface: the FragFX V2. Utter nonsense, really, as the controller only simulates mouse use. Still, better than nothing. And allowing me to keep up with «Bad Company» to some extent was worth the price.
«Battlefield: Bad Company» was the first series entry to deliver a campaign worth playing.
A free-to-play «Battlefield» with comic-inspired graphics in third-person? Sounds sacrilegious, but me and my flatmates from 2009 loved even that. As access had been limited at first, we shared an account and took turns playing. That didn’t stop us from spending countless hours with this simplistic spin-off that wanted to suck money out of your pocket at every turn. The iconic intro theme would still echo through our homes months later – and through our brains for even longer.
EA had long been envious of «Call of Duty’s» sales figures, selling millions of copies every year. They tried desperately to make their own brand more suitable for the masses. «Battlefield 3» finally achieved this feat without losing its own identity. Everything fit together. The graphics were a feast for the eyes thanks to Frostbite Engine 2.0, there was a motivating level system, countless weapons to unlock and plenty of fantastic maps. The largest battlefield to date, Caspian Border perfectly balanced infantry and vehicles, guaranteeing a wild tug-of-war to the very end. Operation Métro, on the other hand, offered heated battles in narrow alleyways and metro tunnels. You could earn a lot of points as a medic, with your comrades biting the dust at quite alarming rates. Medics were also the only reason why rounds didn’t end within minutes, despite record-breaking kill counts.
«Battlefield 3» couldn’t quite keep up with «Call of Duty» with its campaign, but everything fit together in the multiplayer.
This wouldn’t get any better with its successor, «Battlefield 4». Inspecting your friends’ leaderboards and grinning at your superior kill/death ratio did feel great, though. However, constant disconnects and other crashes tarnished the otherwise very solid gameplay. «Battlefield 4» was a cautious upgrade overall. «Levolution» was a new destruction mechanic that caused entire skyscrapers to collapse and shake up large parts of the map. However, normal buildings could no longer be completely flattened. On the whole, it felt like a prettier «Battlefield 3», just with somewhat boring maps. For the first time, I experienced signs of fatigue.
Yes, and then there’s «Battlefield Hardline». A sequel forced by EA to bridge the gap between «Battlefield 4» and the next main instalment. That game’s single-player campaigns were mostly nothing more than an amuse bouche spiced with gunpowder. In «Hardline», the campaign was elevated to main course. Instead of fighting world wars between hostile nations, you’d flash criminals your police badge before handcuffing them. I’m serious. The fact that talented development studio Visceral Games was brought in for this waste of time instead of letting them work on a new «Dead Space» was a massive scandal.
Forgettable filler: «Hardline».
With «Battlefield 1», Dice not only proved that they were still capable of creating enjoyable campaigns, they also dared to tackle a previously unused scenario in the First World War. Despite carbines and slow tanks, the game didn’t lack pacing. Add to that the absolutely colossal staging with epic desert sandstorms and burning zeppelins in the Italian Alps, and «Battlefield 1» clearly stood out from the first-person shooter monotony, bringing a breath of fresh air to the series…
«Battlefield 1» was a stunner, especially visually.
Unfortunately, things wouldn’t get any better with «Battlefield 2042». The setting itself made it clear that Dice or EA lacked the courage to dare something truly innovative. What’s a measly 20 years in the future? Drones and grappling hooks are nice, but that didn’t give the game any character. Doubling the number of players to 128 sounded good in theory, but in reality it merely made for chaotic mass battles – not the beautiful chaos that was once the heart of the series. Annoying chaos, where you die countless boring deaths without having a clue where the action is even taking place. Dice has since removed 128-player mode. A spark of creativity could only be seen in Portal mode. There, you could create your own scenarios using different weapons, maps and modes from all possible «Battlefield» entries. But if I’d rather play «Battlefield 3» there than the actual «Battlefield 2042», this just highlights the problem.
