[citronade]

Well I'm about about to get a new 15 in powerbook (hopefully 1.5 ghz) and that means I'll be able to actually get some games to play which I havent been able to do on my 500 mhz G3 ibook for quite a while. Anyways I'm somewhat of a WWII fanatic and was wonder you thoughts on which of the new WWII games for the macs is the best.
Battlefield 1942, Call of Duty, or WWII Online.

Battlefield 1942 and Call of Duty are both supposed to be amazing. WWII online supposedly had some problems but they might have fixed them. I'm looking for the large battle experience and I'm not sure if Battlefield 1942 is sufficient or if I need WWII online. I might even get two of the three, im not sure. Also I wanted to make sure the 1.5 powerbook would be enough to play these games online.


On another note, the last joystick I had was ADB. Any suggestions on a good USB one for flying WWII planes into battle?

Thanks in advance!

[Luca Rescigno]

Well, you sure won't need a joystick for Call Of Duty. Although the game is an excellent one that I just love, it is also similar to Medal Of Honor in many ways. Everything is super polished, and it's a much, much better game, but the style is still a lot like MOH (walk through a level, kill everyone, except you get allies to help you). It's also the fastest recent Mac game I've seen. The single player campaign is immersive and satisfying, with a fun (and very hard) high difficulty level where you don't get any health packs. The online multiplayer, while entertaining, is not really mind-blowing. It's there mainly because you need something to occupy yourself once you finish the single player game. And it is pretty fun, it's just nothing special.

I haven't played Battlefield 1942, but I am interested in getting it. I wish there was a demo so I got an idea of what it's like - while I don't expect I'll have any problems running it (1.33 GHz G4 w/ Radeon 9800 Pro here), I already have a WWII style game so I don't want to buy another one just like it for the ripoff price (it IS an old game, I shouldn't have to pay full price). From what I've heard, though, BF1942 has really good multiplayer, much better than COD. I haven't heard anything about BF1942's single player campaign, but the fact that no one talks about BF1942 in single player makes me think that its real strength is in multiplayer, and single player is better in COD.

I'd get both, personally, because I love this style of game. But I don't want to drop the cash again - I already paid $50 for Call Of Duty.

[SteevAK]

I think Call of Duty is a great game that is well worth the money, but if you're looking for large battle experiences, then it probably isn't the game for you. At best, you will see some action that involves 4 squads at most. It's pretty much all infantry action too. You do get to blow up some Panzer's with panzerfausts and 88s, but that's rare.

[Maneki Neko]

Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:
I haven't heard anything about BF1942's single player campaign, but the fact that no one talks about BF1942 in single player makes me think that its real strength is in multiplayer, and single player is better in COD.

Battlefield's single player is just the multiplayer maps with bots and slightly different cap points, only really worth while to learn the basic map layout and how to operate vehicles & planes.

To the original poster, all 3 are different games, so it really depends what you're looking for:

Call of Duty is a FPS with a good single player component, and decent multiplayer.

Battlefield 1942 is an FPS, but with an emphasis on the vehicles, which differentiates it from Call of Duty. The Battlefield mods, such as Forgotten Hope and Desert Combat are both great, and make Battlefield well worth it, if it will run well on your system.

World War 2 Online is more of a sim game. Planes behave more like they would in a flight simulator, vehicles are much more compliated to operate and the infantry combat isn't typical run and jump FPS style.

[schuey100]

I think CoD kicks ass.! Battlefield just doesn't do it for me. I've hardly played it. Maybe it takes some time to get into but performance is really bad too compared to CoD and CoD has way better graphics.

[- - e r i k - -]

I'm a more of a single player type, and I just love Call of Duty. Really puts you in the heat of the action. Love the sounds, the effects (shellshock!) and the "feel" of the game. You are not a hero, merely a soldier helping the war along.