The Battlefield 2 Obsession.

Do you think Battlefield 2 is all it's cracked up to be??

  • Hell Yeah!

    Votes: 43 65.2%
  • Not Really!

    Votes: 11 16.7%
  • I'm undecided at the moment.

    Votes: 12 18.2%

  • Total voters
    66

craig

Newbie
Joined
Jul 5, 2003
Messages
2,468
Reaction score
1
Do you think it's really justified? Personally I think it's a good game. I mean it's fairly unique in it's play-style, and it looks pretty nice, but I don't think it's all that it's cracked up to be as far as everyone else seems to be concerned.

When I first downloaded the demo I was buzzing and thought **** yeah, I'm defo buying the game, but with the lack of support for my JoyStick (a sidewinder with midi port needed) and the fact that I don't wanna pay 30 quid for a decent joystick to play it with I'm not really sure if I'm gonna bother buying this anymore..
 
Wow matoor answer. Who'd have thunk it coming from an upstanding American citizen like yourself, eh? :stare:

My point is everyone is pretty much masturbating over this game (I mean it even has it's own forum on a HL2 net board ffs) and I don't think it's "all that".

I mean it runs like shit, even on good PCs, brings very little new to the table that DC didn't have (aside from squad based stuff) and is generally just a glorified mod.
 
Yes, because all Americans are immature asshole jerks.

And all English are proper, civilized people with respect for etiquette.
 
best game ever, nuff said really.
you can look anywhere on this sub-forum and see just how addicted I am.
 
Pesmerga said:
I don't like you, craig.
Wow. I'm not gonna be able to sleep tonight because of that. ;(

*falls asleep*
 
Honestly this'll last me longer than HL2 did, and BF2 runs 100x better than HL2 did on my computer. I've probably played the demo longer than I've played HL2's singleplayer in total.

I barely even played the first BF, I got bored after a few days.
 
:O :O :O :| I just got back from a session, the server I had gone into had the upgraded weapons unlocked! Pure JOY!
 
I played the first BF to death and when that game came out it was totally unique and the stuff mods were doing work wise was revolutionary (on that engine anyway). This time round however it's a rehash (abeit in a different setting but a rehash all the same). I reckon BF2 will have the same life span as BF:VN did rather than 42 and the descision to limit the game to reasonably high spec PC's will be a sore point in many people's eyes... I mean look at the range the source engine works on... PS 1.4 isnt TOTALLY NEEDED for heavens sake.. neither is a USB joystick.
 
craig said:
Wow matoor answer. Who'd have thunk it coming from an upstanding American citizen like yourself, eh? :stare:

My point is everyone is pretty much masturbating over this game (I mean it even has it's own forum on a HL2 net board ffs) and I don't think it's "all that".

I mean it runs like shit, even on good PCs, brings very little new to the table that DC didn't have (aside from squad based stuff) and is generally just a glorified mod.
Define "good" PC.
 
Foxtrot said:
Define "good" PC.

Well it runs like shit on my PC for example.

3200+ XP
1024mb PC 3200 Crucial ram.
36gb Raptor
9800 Pro
 
StardogChampion said:
Honestly this'll last me longer than HL2 did, and BF2 runs 100x better than HL2 did on my computer.
Damn...how much RAM do you have? HL2 worked great for me, but for the first couple of minutes after I join a server [which takes about 5 minutes] it's really choppy/bad/crap/etc.

On topic: Despite this, BF2 > all other online FPS's
 
craig said:
Well it runs like shit on my PC for example.

3200+ XP
1024mb PC 3200 Crucial ram.
36gb Raptor
9800 Pro
My brother has worse than that and it runs fine, what are you trying to do? Run it all on high? Keep the shadows off and the lighting low.
 
The sqauds make a huge difference enough so that some might even consider it a different game. It might not be your cup of tea but it's exactly what most people want. All the improvments and additions in gameplay from BF1942 or DC are spot on. Great gfx and effects. It all works to bring you into the game and plays so much better.

Most of the people that I know from Online games played BF1942/DC a little bit only when we all played together but never alone. I showed em the BF2 videos and they were not that interested. Now that the demo is out they can't get enough of it and some play more than me.
 
Foxtrot said:
My brother has worse than that and it runs fine, what are you trying to do? Run it all on high? Keep the shadows off and the lighting low.

QFT, turning off dynamic lighting and setting shadows to low enabled me to go to 1600x1200 and 6x AA, everything else on medium. Runs very smooth and looks much better. I could probably turn some others to high and be ok, just haven't got around to it...

Edit: I have a similar system to yours, craig...
 
i agree with you this game is absolutely nothing compared to the beauty that is bf1942.
but i think the craze is still justified.
 
mindless_moder said:
i agree with you this game is absolutely nothing compared to the beauty that is bf1942.
but i think the craze is still justified.
1942 was terrible, no one played that game after the mods came out.
 
bvasgm said:
Damn...how much RAM do you have? HL2 worked great for me, but for the first couple of minutes after I join a server [which takes about 5 minutes] it's really choppy/bad/crap/etc.

On topic: Despite this, BF2 > all other online FPS's
P4 2.6Ghz
512Mb RAM
Mobility Radeon 9600 (it's a laptop card, I'm guessing slower than a real 9600).

It's hardly the fastest of comps, but BF2 runs insanely smoothly on 1024x768, obviously everything isn't on "high" in the options menu.

I think everyone gets the choppiness on BF2, but it's nothing to do with your computer, it's the server/netcode, FPS doesn't drop at all.

EDIT: You meant HL2 was choppy? That happens whenever I hear a new sound that my PC hasn't cached, so it stutters for second while it loads it.
 
"Not really" - aka "Hell no". It's running around a heightmap with boxes strewen about, just like 1942.
 
Foxtrot said:
1942 was terrible, no one played that game after the mods came out.

Thank you!!! Someone who finally sees the light.

BF1942 is a horrible, horrible game. I couldn't stand playing it for more than 2 days.

I never played the mods so I can't say how they were, which I think makes BF2 even better for me.
 
Grimfox said:
BF2 Embarks upon gameplay styles we haven't even seen before. Character progression system (persistant ranks ect)
You must not play America's Army. You got access to whole new classes when you reached a certain level. The higher classes even let you customize your weapons by adding scopes, grenade launchers, bipods, silencers, etc. America's Army also had squad gameplay.

Grimfox said:
What, exactly, is original about using the same old realistic weapons that everyone else uses in modern military games?

Grimfox said:
The only big additions are guided and homing missiles. Other than that, barely anything has changed since BF1942 & Desert Combat.

Grimfox said:
christ the whole game is new even the engine
... and? Is that supposed to make the game play better or be more original? All a good engine does is not hold back the designers or hinder the gameplay. A good engine does not a good game make.

BF2 also did not invent commanders, voice communication, classes, etc. What BF2 does is integrating all kinds of old ideas into one cohesive package... and it does that very well. No one part of BF2 is all that original but that doesn't matter because each individual feature has solid implementation and the gameplay is incredible if you use all of them. I had hoped for more innovation and some fresh ideas but what was delivered, as a whole, is nothing short of impressive. It's not the second coming of Jesus in the form of a video game... but it's nonetheless a great game.
 
StardogChampion said:
It's hardly the fastest of comps, but BF2 runs insanely smoothly on 1024x768, obviously everything isn't on "high" in the options menu.

I think everyone gets the choppiness on BF2, but it's nothing to do with your computer, it's the server/netcode, FPS doesn't drop at all.

EDIT: You meant HL2 was choppy? That happens whenever I hear a new sound that my PC hasn't cached, so it stutters for second while it loads it.
So you get lag/stuttering/bad performance when you first join a server? After the first couple of minutes it works great, it's just when I first join that it's bad.
 
French Ninja said:
I think it's highly overrated. :sleep:

Have you played the demo yet? :o

The game is very fun, I love it, I'm going to buy it.
 
craig said:
I mean it runs like shit, even on good PCs, brings very little new to the table that DC didn't have (aside from squad based stuff) and is generally just a glorified mod.
That's pretty much my sentiments exactly. I really don't want to pay 100 bucks AUD for a glorified mod that looks good. It's funny how the gamespot review calls it revolutionary when all it does is add some features from tactical games like Rainbow Six and add them into Battlefield.

And when he said the A.I was good, i laughed very heartily. It's decent at best, but its still Battlefield A.I, which will always be shit.
 
Grimfox said:
and By the way, thunk isn't a word champ, you're looking for the word 'THOUGHT'.

Later :laugh:

Oh really??? Wow, you're really telling me something I didn't know there :stare: and I suppose matoor is an actual word, huh? Look up phonetics in the dictionary. idiot.
 
craig said:
Oh really??? Wow, you're really telling me something I didn't know there :stare: and I suppose matoor is an actual word, huh? Look up phonetics in the dictionary. idiot.

Sparta said:
And when he said the A.I was good, i laughed very heartily. It's decent at best, but its still Battlefield A.I, which will always be shit.

Haha yeah. The A.I. is awful... I tried out SP earlier, capped a flag, waited there and 3 AI controlled charachters came to cap the flag and just ignored me allowing me to spray them down slowly.
 
Pesmerga said:
Have you played the demo yet? :o

The game is very fun, I love it, I'm going to buy it.
It doesnt work on my card.*
Not to mention it has no ninjas.

I might pick this game up(on the sole fact that I have heard of people acting in squads *gasp!*) but until they fix the whole "only some gfx cards can play it at all" Im not going to bother.

*I have a graphics chip(yes you heard me correctly, CHIP, not a card,a chip) that can run the source engine on medium settings with no problems in SP but alot of stuttering in MP. What pisses me off is that ever since the bot patch for CS:S, I have been getting massive lag on every CS:S map and every source engine related mod.
 
craig said:
Do you think it's really justified? Personally I think it's a good game. I mean it's fairly unique in it's play-style, and it looks pretty nice, but I don't think it's all that it's cracked up to be as far as everyone else seems to be concerned.

When I first downloaded the demo I was buzzing and thought **** yeah, I'm defo buying the game, but with the lack of support for my JoyStick (a sidewinder with midi port needed) and the fact that I don't wanna pay 30 quid for a decent joystick to play it with I'm not really sure if I'm gonna bother buying this anymore..

hahaha you use a joystick to fly a jet? You have to have great skills because flying is really hard for me to do with joystick but go ahead and dogfight me if I have a mouse- I am way way better with a mouse and its less hassle to have a joystick/mouse combo. I have no clue why people need a joystick to fly a jet/aircraft. I Just invert my mouse in settings and I can fly no problem.

It used to be hard for me to fly the chopper when they were introduced but after just a few hours of practice its really easy and is easy and running around aiming and shooting at an enemy.
 
I would much rather use a joystick to fly jet aircraft, soley for the reason I can simply hold the joystick down and have a continued roll/spin/turn, unlike a mouse which I have to move to the other side of the mouse pad and do it again and again, which is less effective in-game.
 
Pesmerga said:
I would much rather use a joystick to fly jet aircraft, soley for the reason I can simply hold the joystick down and have a continued roll/spin/turn, unlike a mouse which I have to move to the other side of the mouse pad and do it again and again, which is less effective in-game.

Plus in a helicopter or a plane you don't have to keep tapping the key to keep a constant thrust at half-way if you're trying to hover or go slow.
 
The game does *NOT* run like shit on high end PC's. I bought my comp back in september 2003, okay? I am running everything on high except textures, and lighting which are on medium, and it runs sooo damn fluidly and smooth. Anti aliasing is off, because at 6x I get lots of lag, but the game is always in motion and you dont notice it when you are immersed.

I own the game, and have been playing it, and I think the game is worth its weight in gold.
 
I guess its a mixed bag. Like you Raziaar it runs fine for me. I'v got a p4 2.4GHZ and a 6800GT with 768mb RAM. I think its my card thats pulling most of the weight, everything is on high except textures, i've even got 4xAA on. Looks pretty good though.
 
Back
Top