虽然不是新闻了——战地3将不沿用战地2中的指挥官角色

以下摘自BF3blog:

Going through our latest issue of GameInformer, the question of Commander came up (the Commander feature was available on Battlefield 2, and gave a player command over his team). Here’s what we found in GameInformer:

    Q: When I think about Battlefield 2, I always come back to the Commander position and the game within the game that arose from having Special Forces objectives. Are those returning in the proper sequel?

    A: We could implement it, but the questions is “how do you get the threshold lower?” That’s not by making it more complicated. Our challenge is to make sure that anyone that just jumps into the game will get it. One of the biggest problems with Commander was that only two people could use it. Some people like it but most people didn’t care. They just cared that someone gave them an order or that their squad could play together having fun on their own more or less. Then the most hardcore people went into the Commander mode and learned how to use that. You could argue it was a great feature, but looking at the number you could also say that no one uses it. We tried in Bad Company 2 to give that t players, so you could issue orders to your squad, and you could use gadgets like the UAV that only the commander could use earlier — giving the power back to the players so everyone could use it. That made a big difference. More people could enjoy the game. We lowered the threshold for everyone because we gave it to everyone. We now know the boundaries are for keeping the strategic depth and complexity while lowering the threshold to get in.

The argument that only two players could be commander (each on his team) is valid, but that was the whole point: a commander would lead his team. The notion that the UAV in Bad Company 2 was more accessible is nonsense — there was only one UAV in Bad Company 2. So only one player could use it, as opposed to two commanders in BF2.

If you ask us, this is a textbook example of “dumbing things down”, what DICE calls “make the threshold lower” and we can’t help but feel disappointed that the Commander feature isn’t returning to Battlefield 3. It added a whole new level to the gameplay, which will now be missing in BF3.

大意就是在Dice被问到BF2中的指挥官角色是否会回归的时候表示他们有能力让这个角色回归，但是主要是出于对游戏门槛过高的考虑而不准备回归指挥官。他们的理由是：1.不是任何人一进入游戏就能很快上手指挥官 2.每局游戏只能有2人当指挥官（一方一个）所以感觉就是几乎没人在乎这个角色的感觉。他们觉得像BC2中小队长发号施令，而且人人都有机会用UAV的设定就挺好，所以决定沿用这个设定。

BF3blog给予的评价是：   
一局游戏中只有两个指挥官是事实没错，但是这正是指挥官存在的意义：通观全局指挥战斗。而且说BC2中UAV可用度增强了是错误的，BC2中只有一个UAV而BF2有两个（一方一个）。如果你征求我们的意见，这是一个典型的“弱智化”举动，DICE把它叫做“放低门槛”我们对于指挥官不能回归BF3感到失望，这个角色使整个游戏的游戏性更上一层楼，但是在BF3里不会出现了。

个人感受：
也许在人数少，地图小的情况下感受不到，但是在大范围陆海空配合的战场上一个好的指挥官是不可忽视的：他可以宏观调控各个小队下达正确的命令；他可以通过卫星扫描在地面战斗最激烈的地区放置UAV扫描而大大增强地面部队的预警能力；他可以对敌人密集的区域进行火炮覆盖消灭敌人的有生力量；他可以为步兵空降小车使他们能快速到达有利位置；他可以为缺少弹药需要修理的单位空降弹药/修理箱；他可以手动点出重要的敌人单位以引起己方注意。
这么一个在战术配合上举足轻重的角色就以一个“降低门槛”为理由就取消了，实在让人遗憾。BC2指挥官的缺失不能作为BF3依旧取消指挥官的理由，毕竟BF3有64人大地图的多元化作战，毕竟BF系列本来应该是一个值得长期琢磨把玩而不是一个派对上拿起来就能上手的FPS，毕竟BF3不是BFBC3.

玩过BF2的朋友，喜欢指挥官这个角色的朋友，可以去视频里提到的投票网站给指挥官回归投一票，虽然不一定有用，但是至少相当于烧个香还个愿吧，哈哈。

所有跟帖： 

• am i getting old? -T.iGhost- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/08/2011 postreply 13:54:32

• 回复：am i getting old? -T.iGhost- ♂ (434 bytes) () 09/08/2011 postreply 13:57:45

• 偶有同感啊，等着bf3给注入一针鸡血 -熊猫不害人- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/08/2011 postreply 15:09:33

• 却是是老了。 我深有同感。 -DjTer- ♂ (185 bytes) () 09/08/2011 postreply 15:38:41

• 大家都老了 -T.iGhost- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/08/2011 postreply 18:22:01

• 偶也结婚了~~~~ -DjTer- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/08/2011 postreply 20:18:34

• 不是吧！咋这么快就结婚呢？ -123泛政治化- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/09/2011 postreply 07:50:26

• 是跟剑子吗？ -最爱csEVIL- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/09/2011 postreply 10:38:45

• 人老心不老 -thrawn- ♂ (0 bytes) () 09/09/2011 postreply 10:16:27