Tyler Wilde provides commentary followed by our original review of Battlefield 1942 from the December 2002 issue of PC Gamer US.
I keep seeing Battlefield Hardline derided as a ‘reskin,’ and though I’m not fond of the direction we’ve seen so far, I wonder if that’s fair. If not a new theme and new weapons, gadgets, vehicles, modes, and maps, what is it to be a proper sequel? Does a sequel necessarily include significant graphical improvements? Is that a reasonable expectation today?
In IGN’s review of Battlefield: Vietnam , the first Battlefield game after 1942, Dan Adams calls it ‘more like an impressive mod or an expansion than an entirely new game.’ So the feeling isn’t new, and I suspect a game’s ‘sequel worthiness’ isn’t quantifiableit’s just something we feel. Battlefield 3 is clearly a sequel. BF4 and Hardline either aren’t different enough, or aren’t different in the right ways, so they get called ‘mods’ or ‘expansions.