[ Preview ] BF:Vietnam Hands-On

Winters

IGN.com have a "hands on" preview of Battlefield: Vietnam which also shows some nice new screenshots with new veichles and the like. The article is 3 pages long [so im not posting it here, but may have some quotes] so give it a read, http://pc.ign.com/articles/445/445328p1.html.

New to the BF series is the SA-7 heat-seeking rocket, which only the North Vietnamese Army gets to wield. You'll only get a few missiles at a time, so use them wisely, especially when you're not near a weapons depot. One hit can take down a jetfighter or Huey, making them quite effective for protecting against aerial invasion. The US side won't be able to just hop in a bunch of planes and helicopters and gradually take over the map. We had the best luck when the jets were flying right towards or flying away in a straight line. Anyone who thinks they can just tear by and drop some napalm will be in for a nasty surprise. This weapon is also fairly effective against infantry if you aim at their feet, as long as there isn't a jet-fighter flying past at the wrong time, which will skew your aim.


Thanks to a ton of additional foliage, combat is more intense now. You can never tell where the other guys are going to come from. Snipers can hold a point for much longer, and there are a lot more chokepoints to go around as well. We had a lot of island-hopping and gulch-crossing going on, both of which will cause a dangerous amount of exposure and should make for some memorable battles. Clearing the other side is a must. Your snipers and heavy ordinance guys will make a big difference, so you can't just all be grunts or vehicle users. The NVA engineers can also booby-trap vehicles to blow up when you attempt to hop in one.


Also new to Vietnam is the fact that you can capture a point faster according to how many friendly units are at the flag. Alone, it will take a grueling 30 seconds or so. This goes a lot more towards rewarding team play. Plus, you can press "0" when in a vehicle to bring up a playlist of licensed Vietnam-era music like CCR, Jefferson Airplane, the Kingsmen, Bobby Fuller, and Martha and the Vandellas. Other players will be able to hear your "radio" when they get near, and you can also play your own MP3s, but they'll only hear the default songs.

From IGN.com

See the full article here http://pc.ign.com/articles/445/445328p1.html
Also watch a new video from IGN here: http://media.pc.ign.com/media/568/568737/vids_1.html
More IGN screenshots are here: http://media.pc.ign.com/media/568/568737/imgs_1.html
(The screenshots are worth a look, trust me!)

regeneration

Why are only the US and NVA featuring? There was at least one other Vietnamese faction involved, plus not to mention France; it was a French colony and the war started between them and the Vietnamese. They clearly want to make some apocolypse now style game rather than something that recreated war in the country proper.

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by regeneration
Why are only the US and NVA featuring? There was at least one other Vietnamese faction involved, plus not to mention France; it was a French colony and the war started between them and the Vietnamese. They clearly want to make some apocolypse now style game rather than something that recreated war in the country proper.

Its a game and not a sim maybe?

regeneration

Not the point - hands up how many people know that France fought in the Vietnam war; very few, there's no harm in educating people while they're killing the commies in the jungle - plus it means the game has more content - always good.
Just on numbers, you're getting less from BF:Vietnam than in BF1942.

RicardoSmith

And the Aussies. Its still just a game not a BBC documentary.

regeneration

So why not include some Skuds, and maybe some hovertanks. Ok, that's a little over the top, but if you are going to do something; do it right; don't make a half assed job of it - look at the BF:1942 mod Eve of Destruction, they fully intend putting in all the sides from the conflict, so why can't the "official" mod do the same,with more money and time

RicardoSmith

What % of accuracy do you think is acceptable then? Wheres the line in the sand?

Jim

because [as stated many times before by ea and dice] the role of the official bf is not to create a totally historical accurate game, but rather make the game more balanced so that its "fun" to play.

for example, if you want to get picky about it, the market-garden map is ridiculos. for one the allies never had a plane [except for troop carriers] anywhere near arnhem bridge, aswell as that the only other bridge across the lower rhine in arnhem was a railway bridge, which was destroyed before the battle actually took place. i could go on all day about the historical inaccuraces in bf:1942, but its still a great game.

the reason mods [like fh] make it more historical is because they choose to. they have a different agenda then ea or dice. if you went and made bf vietnam with all the armies involved etc... the game would be huge and ea would probably make it a stand alone rather than an expansion and charge the full 60 squids or whatever.

regeneration

There is none of course - but there's no harm in "enlightening" gamers showing all the major players of the war. I do think the idea of BF: vietnam is pointless, considering it already has a freely available competitor in Eve of Destruction. They promise (and already give) more than the €50 product with less attention to detail. I can see EA shooting themselves in the foot with this one; though most games shoppers are mindless EA whores, so it probably will sell.
Should be interesting to see how it sells.

regeneration

Originally posted by Jimeatsmenu
the game would be huge and ea would probably make it a stand alone rather than an expansion and charge the full 60 squids or whatever.

It _is_ standalone; it's a new build of the game engine, has new coding assigned to it - you will be paying 50 euro for it

RicardoSmith

Originally posted by regeneration
... most games shoppers are mindless EA whores, so it probably will sell...

Most of these are looking for a game, not a history lesson. Most people couldn't point to the country on a map. Those that would appreciate the detail and accuracy you are looking for are a very small minority.

regeneration

Eve of Destruction is free. BF: Vietnam is €50. Which wuold you choose? And the quality of production with EoD is on par with Dice (I'd argue better), and both are professional-looking mods.
Can't help wondering what the logic in EA's head is - I was thinking that DC might eventually be made as a retail exp pack (the team now even has a name - Trauma Studios); not blatently copy an established mod.

Apparently there's another BF1942 exp pack in the pipeline (apparently). Featuring the eastern front + three new sides. Think it's just a rumour though.

Winters

Originally posted by regeneration
Eve of Destruction is free. BF: Vietnam is €50. Which wuold you choose? And the quality of production with EoD is on par with Dice (I'd argue better), and both are professional-looking mods.

Thing is BF:V has been in the pipelines since, well, really when BF1942 was released. Vietnam confolict was the obvious sequal to a fantastic game. There was no doubt that Dice were going to go for the Vietnam war next after WorldWarII. EOD saw what can only be described as a short term niche. Also remember the BF:V engine is totally reworked with new graphics and sound to allow Vietnam baised world to come alive [more jungle etc]. Some of the thing such as Fire dont work well on the origional BF1942 engine [thats why they didnt use Flamethrowers as they had established at the beginning the lag and problems it created]. BF:V wil be a totally reworked engine thats been developed to cater for the developments in technology from 1942 -> 1965/70 such as the introduction of Helicopters into the battlefield, heat seeking missiles [Yes they are coming to BF:V!] and also high explosive and flamable materals [napalm!]. There was no way a EA/Dice team would release a Vietnam mod on the origional BF engine due to its limitations, thats why they re-worked the engine. EOD is a very good mod but built on an engine not sutible for the conflict as we know it [fire and choppers].

I am going to buy BF:V when it comes out, the reasons are simple. It will be a finished* game that will be lots of fun to play. Although its not 100% historically accurate its a game and therefor not required. EOD will appeal to those who do not want to buy BF:V etc. I cant really see it completing all its objectives of the French etc. as i doubt it will last that long. BF:V is being released in March. I would give EOD will the summer before it goes. They will not be able to compete with it due to the inability of the currant BF engine. They mayu however do as FH did and mod BF:V to a more historically accurate game. That would be a lot more likley.

regeneration

Well there was a brief time between the former leader and the team as to whether they would switch engines, so they may just move. But the proof of the pudding will be in the number of active players of both games, especially if BF:V is buggy off the shelf. I'd prefer to see EoD succeed simply because it's an amateur development.

I realise that the BF:V engine will be better and more suited to what technology is required for the Vietnam war (though the napalm in EoD is actually rather good, and didn't cause any lag - nothing noticeable). I think I read that the BF:V version of refractor2 is just a streamlined version rather than a new .0 build.

Winters

Originally posted by regeneration
I think I read that the BF:V version of refractor2 is just a streamlined version rather than a new .0 build.

All the battlefield engines work on the RefractorII engine, they just give them a reworking (eg: CoD used Return To Casstle Wolf engine but changed 80% of it). In Battlefield: Vietnam they have reworked the BF1942/RefractorII graphics engine and developed a new engine for it that includes "Normal mapping". This allows the engine to use complex character and object models without it slowing down your CPU or Graphics. This means you can see players muscles and makes little bumps etc. on what would have been a flat surface. I believe they have also introduced Bump Mapping which alows metal to shine and shimmer in the light. [not too sure if its still in the latest builds of the game but it was in the early ones].

Also I believe they have introduced new parts to the sound engine to allow music to be played and also give the ability to change music on the radio etc. And lets not forget you will be able to listen to your own mp3's on the radio too! [other player will hear default sound]. They have however kept the gameplay as close to BF1942 as possible, the only change were to improve it [such as more friendlies around a flag the shorter time it takes to capture it].

EOD I hope will move to the BF:V engine and create a more releastic game (a.la FH) as I can see that working out better. FH has a large following and many people find that realism can sometimes be better then fun

regeneration

I believe they have also introduced Bump Mapping which alows metal to shine and shimmer in the light. [not too sure if its still in the latest builds of the game but it was in the early ones].

That's not bump-mapping - that's environment mapping - which exists in dozens of games. Bump mapping is what HL2/Doom3 has when it takes say a brick texture, "extrudes" it and lets light fall on the grain and form of the brick. Bump-mapping does eat into CPU :P
Im not to sure that it can do "Proper" jungles, for now the maps just look like more detailed version of the pacific maps from BF1942. I guess Im just not convinced they're releasing a brand new game to get excited about, but actually an exp pack disguised as a new game.

joe90

Regeneration if you don't like the sound off the bf v don't buy it. Stop going on about it you have made your point. The game may not be historical accurte but most games aren't.they are made for enjoyment.

PS don't forget that the kiwis also fought in Nam.

regeneration

And if you don't like me going on about it, don't read the thread. Sheesh. This is the games board, and quite entitled to speak my mind about the game. Communist :P

Winters

Originally posted by regeneration
That's not bump-mapping - that's environment mapping - which exists in dozens of games. Bump mapping is what HL2/Doom3 has when it takes say a brick texture, "extrudes" it and lets light fall on the grain and form of the brick. Bump-mapping does eat into CPU :P

Well im sorry if i got it wrong. What i speak of is newer enviroment mapping that what is currently in BF1942. What they say is that you will be able to see a shine from a snipers gun inbetween vegetation. See the light bounce off a metal helmet etc. (thats what they say). This is what I speak of. They have totally reworked the graphics engine in the refractorII engine to accomadate this.

Originally posted by regeneration
And if you don't like me going on about it, don't read the thread. Sheesh. This is the games board, and quite entitled to speak my mind about the game

This thread is just a simple update about what will be a fantastic game. Anybody who is intrested in the game should read this as it has some new information, screenshots and a video for all too see. They came here (to this thread) to actually get some more information on BF:V not to hear your moaning about it.

Also, people are only allowed to speak their mind if i say so

Winters

Also some more updates on BF:V

Gamespy.com have just released a preview of BF:V. You can read it on their website here. An extract is below which gives an insight, although small, into the change that BF1942 mods made to BF:V.

Before we knew it, our playtime was over and it was time to head back to the sunny confines of GameSpy HQ. Before we did, however, we had a few final questions for EA. When asked about the impact of user-made mods like Desert Combat and Eve of Destruction, Schneider says that Desert Combat in particular showed that gamers were looking for something in a more modern setting... and that choppers are pretty popular. On the subject of tools for mod makers, we were told that BF Vietnam will be "significantly easier" to work with, and that Punkbuster anti-cheat software will be included with the game.

From Gamespy.com

Also posted on the TWL Forums is an interview with Armando "AJ" Marini. You will know him as the Digital Illusions Lead Designer for Battlefield: Vietnam. There is another interview with him posted on a thread a week ago or so. Interview is below in next post as i didnt have enough room here

Winters

Battlefield Vietnam vs. Battlefield 1942:

TWL: The biggest concern that I've heard from the Battlefield community about Vietnam is that the weapons might be too overpowered. For example, the Napalm looks like it could completely devastate grounds troops and almost make them obsolete, when really I think Vietnam should emphasize ground troops more than 1942 does.
AJ: First and foremost, everyone should be aware that this is Battlefield Vietnam. It is not Battlefield 1942 in Vietnam. BF has always been about the balance, but in 1942 being in a vehicle definitely gave you a distinct advantage over the infantry. In Vietnam, this is not the case. It is more balanced and players will look at vehicles as any other weapon in the game. They will ask themselves, “Is this the correct tool at this time?” The infantry experience has been one area where much of the focus has been placed. If anyone believes that it will become obsolete, BFV will change their mind in a hurry.


Vehicles:

TWL: Are the choppers going to handle just like the ones do in Desert Combat?
AJ: Desert Combat is a mod of BF1942. As such, they used the physics system developed for airplanes and applied it to helicopters. We created a new physics system specifically for the helicopters and the various maneuvers they need to perform to truly be helicopters. They hover; they fly sideways, etc, etc. It will take some getting used to, but the helicopters are very rewarding for those who learn to use them effectively.
TWL: How will the connection of Helicopter/Vehicle (pickups) work?
AJ: It’s pretty simple. The pilot needs to hover over the vehicle he wants to airlift, and then he lowers the cable down to it. When the two connect, the pilot can fly away. When he’s at his desired destination, the pilot simply releases the cargo. I suggest that players set the item down on the ground first before releasing though.


Physics:

TWL: Is Battlefield Vietnam going to have the same kind of leading system where you have to aim in front of your targets and judge where they will be 1 second later?
AJ: We believe strongly, that above all else, Battlefield must be a skill game. All weapons have a projectile speed that we adjust so that players need to master the various weapons in the game. It’s very logical for one to think that a moving target is more difficult to hit than a stationary one. One of the reasons for this is the fact that it takes time for a bullet to travel from gun to target. What we’ve done is implemented a system that emulates that. If all you had to do was put the cursor on someone, it wouldn’t be very difficult to make the kill, and therefore less rewarding when you do so.
TWL: Will you be able to knife while in the water?
AJ: There is a delicate balance where believability and game play collide. When you cross too far over the line of believability, people cry foul and say things are “cheap” or “cheesy”. When swimming on the surface of water, you really can’t use any type of weapon effectively against your enemies, so we felt that this is the way it should be in the BF universe. This may change in the future, but for now we are keeping it as is. That said, there are plenty of areas where you wade through the water and so are fully armed. We are also playing with the player speed while in water so it is not so much of a barrier.
TWL: Will there be a lean function? Evolution dictates leaning in gaming.
AJ: We had many features to work on through production. Leaning was mentioned but it was never a high enough priority, so I’m doubtful that we will be able to implement it for BFV. It is something that we would consider more for future projects.
TWL: Will there be a working way to adjust the field of vision?
AJ: The field of view is something that is relied up on for game balancing and performance optimizations. Allowing players to change these settings would compromise too many areas of the game.


Booby traps and moveable spawns:

TWL: What's the info on moveable spawns, can they be placed anywhere?
AJ: Yes, movable spawns can be placed anywhere, for the most part. Sine the U.S. mobile spawn is airlifted into place; being able to put it somewhere awkward would be tricky, but possible. The N.V.A. one is carried by a soldier, so wherever he can go, he can place one although he is not allowed to place one inside buildings.
TWL: Do booby traps work in Multiplayer? If so, how? Are they static areas or can they be placed almost anywhere?
AJ: We have both static and dynamic currently. The static ones are, as the name implies, always in the same locations. They need someone to trigger them, and of course, someone to be in the line of fire to really be effective. They add a lot of emersion to the maps. The kits also have a compliment of traps that can be placed where the player likes. Most of them are explosive in nature, but not all of them. They’re triggered in various ways depending upon the specific item. I don’t want to give away too much.


Maps:

TWL: Will objects in the game be more fluid and changeable than those in 1942. Like can buildings be destroyed, bridges be built, etc.?
AJ: We had discussed it, but regardless of what effect we place on the items in the world, a player would never really be able to affect items in the world as he wishes. A map, like any other game element is an item that needs to be carefully planned and balanced. If someone where to come in and destroy a significant element in it, then that balance is broken. On the other hand, if you plan for a player to break it, then you almost require the player to do so in order to balance out the map. In the end, we chose to have environment that could be depended upon by the players so they become familiar with the map. In the jungle, it is a benefit to know the map.
TWL: How many maps will you be releasing and how many of these maps are well balanced, giving both sides even chances to win?
AJ: There are fourteen maps and they are all designed to be a fair fight.
TWL: Are any of the stock maps larger than a BF1942 stock map (I.e. Midway, El Al, Gazala, etc)?
AJ: No, all the maps are more intimate with more close quarters fighting. That’s not to say there aren’t epic battles, it’s just that you don’t have to travel a long time to get to them.
TWL: Will there be an Ia Drang Valley map as it was the first major conflict of the Vietnam war?
AJ: Yes, we have the Ia Drang Valley. We used tactical maps as a basis for the design and its one of the favorites in the office. We’ve also heard from the community so often, regarding 1942 maps, “oh it would be so cool if they did the next day”. You spoke and we listened so not only do we have the Ia Drang Valley, but we also have the ambush at Landing Zone Albany which occurred several days after the Ia Drang Battle.


Anti-Cheating:

TWL: Have you thought about adding in a 360 cam while spectating, so when you spectate someone you can use a camera pointing in any direction to see anywhere?
AJ: Cheating is a big concern for us. As I said earlier, we feel player skill should be a deciding factor in a game. We disable the third person camera on the soldier so that player’s cannot cheat with it. A rotating camera, although seemingly harmless, would allow teammates to alert others more so than they already do.
TWL: What are you doing to prepare against unknown cheats?
AJ: We recently announced that anti-cheat software would be implemented for BF 1942. The plan is to implement such a system for BF Vietnam as well.


Other Features:

TWL: Will your software development kit include ways to convert over other BF game mods like Desert Combat to BF Vietnam?
AJ: That’s a very good question but I’m not the one to ask. We have people looking at mod support but I don’t know exactly what stage they are at. I do know that there are more requirements on our in game assets than there was in BF1942, so I believe it is safe to assume one could not directly move things over from BF1942 to BF Vietnam. There are many similarities though, so I imagine it can be done with some effort.
TWL: Are there any planned improvements for the net code?
AJ: We have been focusing heavily on the content and new features. As that work is trailing off, we can analyze exactly what burdens we have brought to the net code and make improvements based on that. As you may well imagine, our requirements are somewhat different from those of 1942.
TWL: Will there be improvements in the admin controls, such as. a GUI interface?
AJ: Unfortunately that is something that is not in the launch plans. That said, there is always a possibility for this in the future.
TWL: Do you plan on supporting the competitive community with competition type settings in the game at release?
AJ: I’m not saying that we don’t or won’t like to see the game used in competition, but we have not done anything with the specific intent of competition in mind. That said, our new custom combat mode could be used in that application. By restricting what weapons players can use, you can have more control over how scoring is achieved. If you wanted to have an M16 only competition, you could do that.
TWL: Can you release any information to us about expansions that you are thinking of?
AJ: Being completely honest, we haven’t had the time to think about expansions.


From TWL Forums

regeneration

Originally posted by Winters
This thread is just a simple update about what will be a fantastic game. Anybody who is intrested in the game should read this as it has some new information, screenshots and a video for all too see. They came here (to this thread) to actually get some more information on BF:V not to hear your moaning about it.

Also, people are only allowed to speak their mind if i say so

That's why god invented killfiles for BBSes Im only moaning about parts of it, im genuinely interested in the towing facility with the choppers; it would be cool to tow some artillery across the map to dump it onto the enemy's base - I can see a new evolution of spawn-camping.

pucan

Originally posted by regeneration
Why are only the US and NVA featuring? There was at least one other Vietnamese faction involved, plus not to mention France; it was a French colony and the war started between them and the Vietnamese. They clearly want to make some apocolypse now style game rather than something that recreated war in the country proper..... hands up how many people know that France fought in the Vietnam war; very few,

Man, for somebody whose being so pedantic you get your facts straight. Vietnam was a colony of france until 1954 when the were driven out by communist gurrilas. The country was then split. The Americans didn't get involved until after the french had left. the french had no involvement with the "Vietnam war" which began in 1957.

Bunny

I'm am gonna set myself on fire outside a games shop to protest this terrible injustice to history.

regeneration

mmmm boards.ie user - crispy and good with mayo

Jim

quite like duck

regeneration

Well I generally prefer duck a-la agent orange. narf narf.

Hmmm there's a good idea to counter sniping in that game; have agent orange canisters that will destroy the bushes around the map, removing cover; oh and poisoning all the troops on the map. :cool:

Winters

Seems as though with the Release of Battlefield: Vietnam only months away reviews are coming in thick and fast for it. Here is another one from 1up.com

EA foolishly lifted my permanent ban from its campuses so that I could come down to the always posh Redwood Shores office and play Battlefield: Vietnam to my heart's content. There it was promised I would be delivered a computer, a game, many freshly baked chocolate chip cookies and cold Diet Coke. I warned the two billion dollar a year company's reps that I'd likely never leave. They seemed cool with it. If only they all knew.

I've left elderly relatives at the airport and surprisingly attractive girlfriends at bus stops so that I could complete single BF matches that lasted upwards of eight hours. I have endured the most complex and gloriously cooperative multiplayer sessions with and against friends for more than 20 hours straight, forgoing things like work, sleep, and sustenance. I have hunted down plane campers using IP addresses just so that I might inflict real world beatings on them and feel vindicated by the sweet rush of satisfaction only vengeance can offer. Yes, I have and cherish each expansion and await every new patch, map, and high profile mod update with eager anticipation. Throw some cookies and Diet Coke at me and I'm not going to stop playing unless your security staff whips out the cattle prods and forces the issue electrically.

This blatant praise of the series is not to say I didn't have my reservations coming into the play test. I worried that much of my beloved Battlefield experience would be lost when it came to a completely different kind of popularized warfare without clear-cut, usually epic fights of good vs. evil or the Empire vs. the Democratic U.S. I'm cynical, to be sure, but also a realist who's able to admit when his wafting pessimism is unwarranted. This is Battlefield. This is good.

I began play as an American -- quick to shoot and quicker to steal choppers. I noticed first that the menu system has been retooled. Though largely placeholder, it's adorned by various Apocalypse Now style fonts. Also, air and boat control configurations gave the options to bind many seats to many keys, which implied mobile spawn points, which just happen to be in there. After correcting the crazy controls the slightly evolved ape who sat before me used (I'll nickname him Dead Man Walking), I jumped into our first session with courteous EA testers who refrained from slaughtering us all long enough so us "journalists" could get accustomed to the new helicopters, boats, tanks, weapons, and classes.

The classes are the biggest outright change. For Conquest mode, there is only the option to play as Soldier, Scout, Heavy Gunner and Engineer, each with different superficial images. Each class comes equipped with a specific sidearm (usually a type of pistol) and provides players the option to choose between one of two primary weapons. In the case of the American heavy gunner, this could be an M60 or a rocket launcher, while the Vietcong get two brands of explosive death and no machinegun. Also of note is how grenades are no longer uniform between classes. Some troops come equipped with traditional frag grenades in their kits while others receive smoke, which makes the scout pretty much useless against any sort of armor that has a high tolerance for orange smoke. Also notice the medic class is no longer available in Conquest mode. Editorial is torn on this, but I firmly believe it needs to go back in along with an Enemy Territory inspired skills tracking system that awards people for repairs, heals, target placement, and so forth. If only.

Once play began, I quickly realized that everything else was virtually the same. The jungle adds a big change, but gameplay is decidedly Battlefield in delivery. Long leads when on-foot, the critical collaboration of shelling, entrenching, sniping and soldiering, and proper vehicle use are all still necessities. Obviously the dense plant life must be dealt with in new and exciting ways (running through it or driving around it), but the base game is exactly what it should be: Battlefield, only in Vietnam. The three maps demoed (Flaming Dart, Ho Chi Minh Trail, Operation Game Warden) contained outrageous amounts of jungle, hills, winding streams (that still demolish vehicles), pitfalls, huts and more. Unfortunately, there will be no rain, nor will napalm level forests, but the change of setting is not only visually appealing, but also modifies the gameplay quite a bit.

Soldiers are of far greater importance than they ever were. Tanks, though technically capable of plowing over specific trees in a fashion not at all dissimilar from Call of Duty, are relegated to roadway action, which themselves can be treacherous and bumpy. This makes runs into and around the many shaded jungles of utmost importance for the normal infantryman. Particularly interesting is how once prone in a vegetated area, enemies will not be able to see your target nametag. They will, however, be able to see you if you're just a hill away, for at that distance the vegetation from another person's perspective stops drawing and it would appear as if you were sitting on a barren landscape.

Focusing more on ground pounding doesn't mean Battlefield suddenly turned Quake. Vehicles like assault and transport helicopters, jets, and a variety of boats, still play critical roles in a number of engagements. The specific functions of the troops also help maintain the slower-paced, slightly more strategic BF approach to things. For example, Vietcong engineers can set explosives on vehicles that only detonate when someone attempts to use them, multiple people at a flag cause it to go up that much faster, and zooming while walking slows movement, as does wading through water (depending on kit). See, it's still Battlefield.

Digital Illusions is good. The boys spread across two campuses in Sweden and one in Canada have created Rallisport, Rallisport 2, Battlefield, Road to Rome, Secret Weapons, Midtown Madness 3, and now this, Battlefield: Vietnam. Though the game is not as immediately impressive as most sequels are expected to be, it was exactly what I was looking for: a more robust, more polished Battlefield experience. Long time players of the series may be a bit disappointed come March since Vietnam is more of a perfected Eve of Destruction than it is an entirely new game with Soldner style destructibility and loads of drastic changes, but that won't change the fact that it's bound to still be good.

From 1up.com

regeneration

*doing Winters job*;)
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/battlefieldvietnam/preview_6085902.html
says here that the vietnam engineer class has the ability to dig up and move spawn points using his shovel. That's nuts