Battlefield 2142 (PC) > Reviews > Could have been much better.

Author's product rating:   

Playability & Enjoyment	OK -
Graphics	OK
Sound	Not bad - needs improving
Difficulty & Complexity	Very simple

Advantages:	The combat is somewhat fun, albeit clumsy .  Some of the technology is cool .
Disadvantages:	No real improvement, could have been an expansion, looks more like 2042, clumsy mech, etc .

Recommend to potential buyers:

no

Full review

So, here is the next battlefield game we have all been waiting for. And look, it's a huge disappointment.

Gameplay: Uh, 6. Kind of fun, but boring. I could just play battlefield 1942, it's not really all that different. Hard to get into the battle if you do not have a vehicle. Vehicles are somewhat clumsy, and walking around for ages can be cumbersome.

Some more things:

1. Really crappy storyline. Some random ice age, war, blah blah blah.

2. Yes, it's unrealistic. The setting resembles 2042 more than 2142, if that. Check out 'future force warrior', and find out why we won't be using assault rifles in 75, let alone 150 years. Militaries would most definitely be more mechanized by 2142.

3. Aside from that, all the other weapons are also merely futuristic versions of the ones found in battlefield 1942, with some sleek designs. However, they're usually incredibly weak, for the most part. 4. Combat has not evolved much at all. It's still the EXACT same as today, with a walker that just functions as a walking tank. THERE ARE NO OTHER ELEMENTS THAT MAKE IT SEEM FUTURISTIC. "Oh, let's throw in some sleek looking BS, and say it takes place in 2142." That simply does not work.

5. Titan mode is kind of fun, but really not that different than other conquest modes. 6. Environment is too similar to today. Double lined roads, buildings don't really look all that different. 7. It simply does NOT give the feeling of a large scale war! There need to be massive numbers of troops, heavy planes, and anything that would be used to launch a large scale futuristic assault (minus superweapons, or they could include smaller ones).

8. I really don't get the 'future' feel when everything pretty much functions the same way it does today. I just don't.

Compare all the things we have today to things in 1870, and you'll catch my drift.

Graphics- Eh, for a game that's coming out now, decent, but really not all that special. The environments are fairly dull, and could have been made much better and varied (cities, anyone?) That is all. Sound-alright. The orders and voices could have been made less irritating, but the explosions were pretty cool, generally.

value- Not an absolutely terrible game, but surely not worth fifty bucks.

All in all, it's not a bad game, but it's just a total ripoff of battlefield 1942. Also, they failed to give it a futuristic feel and setting; what it was supposed to be. The combat also has not changed at all; if you are afraid to upset the battlefield purists, DO NOT PUT IT IN 2142! If you put it in 2142, make it DIFFERENT. Even if they wanted to use projectile based weapons, there are many other types that could have been implemented. It's kind of fun to play, but the weapons are fairly lame, and unoriginal. Gets a five, because it's not all that bad, but it's by no means good. I know many people will still buy boring, rehashed games, and that's why they still sell. But personally, I really would like something more interesting than this.