|
07-04-2004, 03:35 AM
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Holy Knight of The Alliance
Location: Stormwind, The Eastern Kingdoms, Azeroth
|
Shit, I'd pick up both. Then download Desert Combat.
__________________
What do you say to one last showdown? - Ocelot, Metal Gear Solid 3 The password is "Who are the Patriots?" and "La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo." "La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo." Gotcha. - The Colonel and Snake, Metal Gear Solid 3 |
|
|
07-04-2004, 11:04 AM
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Knight of the Old Republic
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
|
Battlefield 1942 is about 80% vehicular combat while Battlefield Vietnam is about 30% vehicular combat. If you want to be awesome in planes, tanks, jeeps, and any other type of war vehicle, I'd go with 1942. If you want to be a Rambo-type of person that simply shoots everyone, then Vietnam is the game. I love both games, but both are more different than they seem on the outside. The entire level designs for both games accomodate different types of gameplay (1942 vehicles, Vietnam foot-soldier).
Battlefield 1942 is the obvious better deal since it comes with all of the expansions now for $40 or $50. 1942 also has the best multiplayer mod ever made, Desert Combat. The DC mod could be a game by itself. It has enough quality put into it to make it worth buying at a store. That's a huge plus considering it's free! Vietnam is also a lot harder than 1942. You can't just go and shoot people with tanks. You have to have a lot of twitch-skill to be good at Vietnam. I've almost stopped playing 1942 all together recently...Vietnam is more fun when it comes to Rambo-type gameplay. It's a little bit more addicting than 1942 in certain aspects as well. I'd buy 1942 if ya want the best deal, and Vietnam if ya want the newer, more infantry-based type of game. Either way, you're putting money into two of the funnest online games ever made! -Lasereth
__________________
"A Darwinian attacks his theory, seeking to find flaws. An ID believer defends his theory, seeking to conceal flaws." -Roger Ebert |
|
|
| Tags |
| 1942, vietnam |
|
|
