How different do you think BF2 would be if it was published by a different company than EA. Dou think i would be better gameplay wise if it was published by someone different.
-
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
Nah, I think Dice gets to do what they want for the most part. I think we might have a more solid game though because of the absence of big-business junk. -
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
i would have prefered bf2 was made by epic on the unreal engine
probably more stable, and better frame ratesComment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
I think if it was released by anyone else it would be better quality. I can imagine that DICE does everything they can to make a great game but they have the bean counters looking over their shoulder all the time.
I bet if Vivendi/Valve got a hold of it the quality would improve dramatically.Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
i think taht it would not have been good because EA has already made the other BF games and if a new company made it there would be even more bugsComment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
i highly doubt there would be more bugs
if valve/epic made bf2 i guarantee it would run better, faster, and it wouldnt suprise that the reports of "hackers" dropped by 99% as wellComment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
Nice question from the OP! I personally believe that BF2 would perform better and would be more stable. For example, I have never had a problem with Valve/Steam stuff so why should BF2 EA/Dice be an exception?Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
I think that DiCE has the forumla correct for making this style of game. I do not think anyone could match it. This is in regards to playing style, feel, movement, layouts and balance. If you look at other outdoor FPS games, it is hard for them to strike the correct levels. DiCE, gets a thumbs up for that...they understand the magic.
Now, on the technical side, I think they are way behind...fully, hands down. My biggest gripe was they did not push the envelope in technology in anyway. For the ammount of machine they require for their code, any other gaming company could have done twice as much with 2/3s the hardware requirements.
Really, when you start to look at games that came out several months before BF2, namely Farcry, Doom3, or even HL2, you can see a marked leapfrog in technology.
First, widescreen support. Second, dual-core/multi-threaded code. x64 support. Hell, they only have 64 player maps...to be honest, when I was back playing DC and I heard trauma was getting bought, I thought 'oh God! DiCE is going to make a new game called BF1992 and it going to kick ***! It is going to have 128 player maps, huge sea battles, massive maps!' And when they started showing footage and everything, I was like Wow, they have cool squad features, they have lock-on missles, great! They have sharp looking graphics! But when you start to peel away the surface, you start to see a cake box full of half mixed ingredients.
I think they rushed to market too soon with their product. When they announced their timeline, I was like WTF, that is less then 14 months way! Wow, they are really far along. They were showing footage of Kubra and this and that tuning...but, then they delayed and I though, OK, this could be a good thing.
Now, in hindsight, I think they should have delayed announcing for 3 more months then had an extra three months of development. Hell, I don't think BF2142 is really that special either.
If John Carmack had made this game, it would be revolutionary, not evolutionary.Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
Originally posted by Warm Pudgy
AGREED!!!!Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
I would prefer another company. We wouldn't have silly booster packs, along with ranked servers.Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
For one it would have bloodComment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
i wish valve made bf2. then it chould use the steam engine, which automaticaly updates when they change sometin. that way they can fix **** all the time without releasing a stupid patch that half the noobs dont know about. for thoes that dont know, valve are the ppl that made halflife 1 and 2 and continue to support there best mod{counter strike} to this very day, infact there almost totaly redoing it this month. man i love valve... i wish everytime i play bf2 that dice whould just sell the bf franchise to them .Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
Yeah just as on counter-strike I even used YaMH Multi-hack on CS 1.6 offline and online in a empty server with friends VAC2 sucks :laugh:Originally posted by Warm Pudgy
Punkbuster takes good care of those hacks.. :)
And VAC doesn't even hardware ban..Comment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
I'm an avid CSS player myself. I love what they're doing with the game this month. I'm psyched. And every time somebody complains about that newest bug Valve's accidentally let through the update, or that Valve doesn't support the game enough, I just point them through to BF2. Valve support for their games is betterthan any other FPS developer on the market. Only Blizzard really tops them in that respect, but thye;re filthy rich because of it, so they have a good reason for that.Originally posted by JerseyBricklayerComment
-
Re: How different do you think BF2 would be if....
well... bf2 was the only battlefield game that i have issues with. i have 1942 and vietnam, run great no crashes, ever!
i think someone like activision could of made this better in some waysComment
Comment