|
 |
|
| | Title:
Brothers In Arms: Earned In Blood
..............................................
System:
Xbox
..............................................
Genre:
First Person Shooter
..............................................
Publisher:
Ubisoft
..............................................
Developer:
Gearbox
..............................................
Release:
October 3rd, 2004
..............................................
Online:
Yes
..............................................
ESRB:
M
..............................................
 |
It goes without saying that Brothers in Arms gave gamers one of the most unique FPS WWII experiences. Whether it was the one button squad command system, the tactically aware A.I. or Gearbox’s drive to produce the most historically accurate WWII videogame; everyone can agree Brothers in Arms was great. But for all its contributions to videogames, Brothers in Arms did have shortcomings. Some levels were too short and linear, the A.I., while dangerous, did not use tactics as effectively as they could have, and the multiplayer was not utilized as much as it could have been.
In a move which shows why they are one of the best in the industry, Ubisoft and Gearbox began constructing a sequel. Titled Brothers In Arms: Earned In Blood, the game is shaping up to be quite a hit. It’s doing what all sequels should; fix all the problems of the original while at the same time expanding the gameplay.
Brothers in Arms followed the story of Sergeant Matt Baker. Baker was a member of the 101st Airborne who parachuted in before D-Day to ready Normandy for the impending invasion. The game let players command a squad of soldiers as they carried out vital missions for the Allied Forces. These missions had Baker and his men traversing wide open plains to tight urban environments; all the while taking out the German forces. One of the soldiers encountered often in the game was a man by the name of Hartsock. It is this man who gamers will take the role of in Earned in Blood. It seems Hartsock has been promoted to Sergeant like Baker and his own squad to command. While it’s unknown whether Baker and Hartsock’s paths will cross through the single player campaign it is obvious the ultimate goal of both will be the same; removing the German forces from Normandy. Hartsock is going to be sent on missions deep into German territory; some of them familiar while others new.
The levels of Earned in Blood are promised to be bigger and less linear than anything found in Brothers in Arms. This was one of the biggest gripes fans had. The levels seemed to “push” the player along, forcing him into tactical situations the designers had already set up. There was not a great deal of spontaneity to the missions if played over; once you played them one time you knew what was going to happen. Hopefully, with the less linear level design of Earned in Blood each encounter will be unique regardless of how many times the level has been played.
Enemy A.I. is also said to be much more difficult. Difficult to the point where veteran players are going to have to rethink how to approach Earned in Blood. Remember how the Germans would stay in one spot regardless of where the player was attacking from? Not anymore. These Germans are smart and will use the same tactics players do. If they see a potential flanking position they will take it laying down cover fire and moving appropriately. Staying in one spot or leaving your men in one spot is no longer a good idea. It guarantees instant death. The result is much more frantic and tense gameplay. Players and the German A.I. will constantly be moving their men across the levels and thanks to the much more open design could be doing this for quite a while. If this does not increase the difficulty level the presence of more urban single player missions will. The urban missions in Brothers in Arms were the hardest in the game because of numerous German forces and number of tanks littering the maps.
But once the player gets into the perfect spot he’ll need weapons. Earned in Blood is going to expand the number of weapons available to the players; as all sequels should. The final number of weapons has not been announced but it’s obvious the Americans and the Germans are both going to get an expanded arsenal.
The multiplayer of Brothers in Arms was one of the unique experiences found on Xbox Live. Players were given command of either one or two squads (based on how many people were playing) and were thrown into matches where completing objectives (or preventing them) were the key to victory. Players could take the role of either the Germans or Americans, and an intimate knowledge of tactics and the map were key for victory. Running and gunning almost always got you killed. But beyond the online multiplayer Brothers in Arms offered no other multiplayer options. It was either play online, system link or split screen or not at all. Gearbox noticed this mistake which is why in addition to the multiplayer Earned in Blood will also feature a rich Co-Op experience.
Skirmish mode is the real treat here. Skirmish mode offers several types of missions that make some wonder if designers from Ghost Recon 2 stepped in to give input. The first are objective based missions. Players will be able to complete these via split-screen, system link or through Xbox Live. There will be both American and German missions in this mode. How popular it will be to play as the Germans though remains to be seen. Objective based missions will contain any number of objectives to be carried out and will require team work. No Lone Wolf’s here. The other game types have not been talked about much; all we know is that one involves time based missions while the other is all about survival.
Brothers in Arms is arguably the best World War II shooter on consoles. While it had its share of faults, it also had an equal amount of stunning innovations. Earned in Blood’s plan is to remove all the faults while improving the innovations. The result is what looks to be one of the best WWII shooters coming out this fall. The Xbox may be going out of style; but it’s not going lightly.
|
|
| |
 |
|
|
|
 |
