Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

**Smokalotapotamus** · 09-07-2006, 03:17 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

It's very sad, but true... Dice and EA don't care one bit about the community. You are very right.

**delemorte** · 09-07-2006, 03:20 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

i dont blame EA. If i was a Dev and worked my @$$ off i would not want to partisipate in a comunity that took such great pleasure in insulting me.

If this comunity was more focused on making the situation better rather than flaming the hell out of the game they might partisipate more.

**AxisKiller** · 09-07-2006, 03:20 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

I agree in full with you whatis. What is the other game you are playing? Those forums you mentioned sounded like Sword of the Star's forums. Everyone there is very friendly and if there's a bug, people discuss possible solutions and the developers help sort it out. Really awsome game SotS is, check it out here.

**~WPN~Major Ursa** · 09-07-2006, 03:22 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

I would say that the tension you perceive stems from the undelying feeling of disappointment that many BF1942/Desert Combat players felt after realising that BF2 did not live up to the hype. I for one eagerly awaited what EA/DICE lead me to think was going to be Desert Combat 2. I mean, they even bought Trauma Studios, the guys that made the original Desert Combat mod for BF 1942. Why wouldn't anyone think that BF2 was not going to be DC2?

I really can't speak for the players that never knew Desert Combat, but I would guess that a lot of newcomers got a bit ruffled with the bugs and patch after patch that only seemed to make a bad situation worse.

The introduction of stats for unlocks and ranks has attracted some very bad elements to the game as well. Sure, you had cheaters in BF1942 and its mods, but they really were just an annoyance rather than a pox upon gameplay. Cheaters had nothing to gain other than personal satisfaction from co-opting other people's fun. Cheaters in BF2 get to advance and can benefit when it comes down to certain leadership roles available only to advanced rank. (commander). It also seems that the teamwork seen in BF1942 and Desert Combat is truely a thing of the past. When it was more important for your side to win the round than it was for you to rack up points as an individual, people just worked together more. Sure, the best players got their name at the top of the board after each round, but when the next round started, everyone was back on equal footing. Skilled players were known by their screen name and not by their K/D ratio (which padders have nullified in BF2 anyway).

Basically, BF2 had everything going for it. Yes, it sold a bajillion copies, but BF2 failed to deliver what it originally promised to be. And on that, I am certain.

**Consultant01** · 09-07-2006, 03:23 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

Originally posted by whatistocome

I've started playing a different game a lot (although I still love BF2). I checked out the other game's forums. The difference between those forums and these forums are night and day. I wonder why? (I'm asking seriously, not sarcasticly).

The other game's forum members seem to stay on topic, complain less, are more patient and tend to have a more balanced give-and-take relationship with the developer/vendor than this community has with DICE/EA.

A new bug crops up? It's discussed. Potential fixes (gameplay, balance, etc) are thrown around. The developer participates directly in the discussion.

Connection problems with the developer's service? Members rightfully complain and are bummed out and the developer is quick to say that there is a problem and when it should be up. The members seem appeased and show patience most of the time.

Compare that to these forums. The majority of threads are DICE/EA/BF2 bashing. About how Dice can't get things right, EA is just out for the money, etc. There is little objective, civil conversation (in my opinion).

I'm wondering where this stems from? It's like watching a bad romantic relationship:

The members (like a woman) complain about issues and problems in the relationship ad naseum to the point where EA/DICE (the man) just ignores her because he doesn't want to hear it anymore.

OR

The members (the woman again) have a right to complain because EA/DICE have "screwed up one too many times and she's not going to take it anymore"?

OR is it a combination of both (it takes two to tango)? I've only been playing BF2 for a little while so I don't know the history here. I hope that most can admit that the relationship between the members and DICE/EA here is pretty damaged, but I'm wondering where does that come from? All that I know is that I still come here for the occasional helpful/interesting thread, but it's pretty painful/annoying.

Please, get the "if you don't like it here, then leave" posts out of the way quick. Get past that, get real and start discussing this real issue (and stay on topic!) :)

- Jason

I'll give 5:1 odds that the game you're talking about is an MMORPG and it's developed by a company named after a serious snow storm and its initials are MOM upside down.

1. They have an awesome reputation for this.
2. Their community is, on the whole, more mature than most I've seen.
3. The players of this game pay each month for the priviledge so they have a vested interest in improving the situation and maintaining civility.

MMORPG communities are just better, in general.

When I first came to THIS BF2 forum from another BF2 forum, I was surprised at how mature and civil the place was, seeing as it is an FPS game and the FPS crowd has done more in the past to make gamers look bad than almost every other genre of game ever... it was a place much like the one you describe in your post.

It seems that since 1.2 though, the place has taken a sharp turn toward the melodramatic and negative. When word came around that a successor to BF2 was coming (BF2142), the community here assigned EA the "Evil villian" role and every patch since then has been labeled by the vocal minority as "the nail in BF2's coffin" and EA has once again, become an evil corporation that hates its customers...

That's the nature of the beast.

Small communities within the greater community may resemble a decent place to be, but big forums like this are cess-pools of negativity in most cases.

Its a bunch of folks feeling abandoned by a developer because they would dare to move on from BF2 as a company...

These are just my opinions and observations.

Prepare yourself though... for the onslaught of ***-clownery that has become commonplace on TBF2.

Regards,

Consultant

**AxisKiller** · 09-07-2006, 03:26 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

Nice useless comment woody....

To Ursa:
I agree, the addition of ranks and unlocks (along with commander position coupled with rank) has introduced a lot of trouble. DICE should've just left the general gameplay of BF42/DC intact and added some new features, like commander position. They also should've made the choppers fly like DC's choppers. That way no newb/n00b can just hop in a heli and own everyone..it takes lots of practice to master DC's choppers.

**Consultant01** · 09-07-2006, 03:31 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

Originally posted by ~WPN~Major Ursa

Basically, BF2 had everything going for it. Yes, it sold a bajillion copies, but BF2 failed to deliver what it originally promised to be. And on that, I am certain.

This guy is one of like 4 on here who's opinion I deeply respect, so Mr. Bear (Ursa), I am seriously asking here. I wasnt a huge BF1942 fan but I moved away from FPS for a while before I really got into DC and played very limited amounts of BF:V. I dabbled in MMORPG's for a while such as DAoC and WoW before regaining my sanity and coming back to the BF universe in BF2.

Anyway... all that to ask, What did "they" actually promise v.s. what expectation was heaped on them based on their relationship with the DC developers? What was in DC that isnt in BF2 that would make BF2 that much more "complete"?

Understand, I'm not asking to be a smartass, I honestly don't know and am curious. Because in its basic form, BF2 delivers that intense BF experience just as well as BF1942 did. What was DC that BF2 isnt?

Thanks.

-Consultant

**||3rb||MOBB** · 09-07-2006, 03:41 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

jason,
The issue for me personally isnt the fact that there were problems with the game, it was how the problems were handled entirely. The stability issues alone were detrimental by themselves, making multiplayer almost unplayable at times. Now, if this was fixed within a timely manner 2 weeks, I think most people would have been happy, but the problem was alowed to continue for over 4 months. Also, keep in mind people were paying for ranked servers at this time that did not perform reliably because of this issue.

Before the stability issues peaked in patch 1.3 literally making the game unplayable, there were other bugs and issues, red tag/ blue tag bug being the most notable in my mind for the ability of Dice/EA to recognize it, say it had been fixed when it in fact had not been. yes, even 1.4 claims to have fixed the tag bug and did NOT.

Mean while, all these patches consistantly fail, EA/DICE manage to make these booster packs all the while the game at its fundamental core, is broken and unstable. Not only do they try to sell you add ons for a broken product but they announce bf2142 as the latest and greatest. All in all, I think most people feel like EA/DICE took the money and ran, leaving all of us holding the bag.

On top of all of this, there has been mulitple hacks and exploits that have not been corrected for at least 4 to 5 months, one example of this is the commander hack where someone hijacks commander controls and can drop cars, crates and artillery to the point where it crashes the server. You can say this is a punkbuster issue but IMHO EA/DICE/PUNKBUSTER really dropped the ball on this, only adding to the frustration of the community. How impotent is punkbuster if it cant resolve a cheat 5 months old?

You'll notice I didnt bring up gameplay issues because this is a subjective issue open to oppinion and preference. Imho, I prefer to adapt and overcome, if gameplay is a certain way, you know what to expect and you can adjust, but like I said this is my personal oppinion, I can however understand how people would certain aspects as the j10 issue to be adjusted, but I think being able to play on a reliable server is more important.

So Jason, there is a plethora of reasons why people are unhappy with EA/DICE, myself being one of them, and being as that you claim to be new to the BF2 community I felt that you deserve at least a cliffnotes version of what has happened so far. I hope this helps explain the widespread dissent with EA/DICE.

**CATIA** · 09-07-2006, 03:41 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

Originally posted by ~WPN~Major Ursa

I would say that the tension you perceive stems from the undelying feeling of disappointment that many BF1942/Desert Combat players felt after realising that BF2 did not live up to the hype. I for one eagerly awaited what EA/DICE lead me to think was going to be Desert Combat 2. I mean, they even bought Trauma Studios, the guys that made the original Desert Combat mod for BF 1942. Why wouldn't anyone think that BF2 was not going to be DC2?

I really can't speak for the players that never knew Desert Combat, but I would guess that a lot of newcomers got a bit ruffled with the bugs and patch after patch that only seemed to make a bad situation worse.

The introduction of stats for unlocks and ranks has attracted some very bad elements to the game as well. Sure, you had cheaters in BF1942 and its mods, but they really were just an annoyance rather than a pox upon gameplay. Cheaters had nothing to gain other than personal satisfaction from co-opting other people's fun. Cheaters in BF2 get to advance and can benefit when it comes down to certain leadership roles available only to advanced rank. (commander). It also seems that the teamwork seen in BF1942 and Desert Combat is truely a thing of the past. When it was more important for your side to win the round than it was for you to rack up points as an individual, people just worked together more. Sure, the best players got their name at the top of the board after each round, but when the next round started, everyone was back on equal footing. Skilled players were known by their screen name and not by their K/D ratio (which padders have nullified in BF2 anyway).

Basically, BF2 had everything going for it. Yes, it sold a bajillion copies, but BF2 failed to deliver what it originally promised to be. And on that, I am certain.

Good post. I would like to add couple more key issues why the bf series community is so angry toward EA/DICE.
Poor support: faulty patches (well 1.4 is decent so far, but it took them over a year to get it out a decent patch), wrong release dates, dumbing down game play with each patch (just my opinion).
Greed: Back in DC days, the Devs gave us free maps, weapons and content. In bf2 they're selling them, while the game is going down the crapper.
Controling servers: You pay good money for a server which you have no control over. In DC we used to run knives and RPG's only server, planes only server etc.. BF2 if you do any of these things, some kid will report you and EA will take away your server.
Ranks: Most players no longer play the game for fun, they play it to get their meaningless medals/ranks, they whine if you tk punish them, and they'll tk you to get in the gunner seat to get their badge.

**imported_The 13th Raptor** · 09-07-2006, 03:43 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

People here are constantly bashing and flaming Dice/EA because BF2 is a trainwreck, we know they can do better.. But they do not listen to us at all, their game designs defy logic on more than one occasion, and at the end we are pissed off because BF2 could be 4 times the game it is, but EA wont let Dice put any efford into it.

**||3rb||MOBB** · 09-07-2006, 03:49 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

with all due respect raptor and as much as I agree with you on some points I think alot of your post might be considered speculation.

**imported_The 13th Raptor** · 09-07-2006, 03:53 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

What part of my post? I know Dice can make a better engine, and game, i know so because ID software does so, and Valve, there is no question about it, the crappyness of BF2 is due to lack of efford and not ability.

**||3rb||MOBB** · 09-07-2006, 03:56 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

My appologies, I meant the part that this game could have been 4 times what it was. It's hard to tell where the ball was dropped or who dropped it, only that it was dropped. Didnt mean to discount your post, poor writing on my part :)

**lynxlyran** · 09-07-2006, 03:58 PM

Re: Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

I would be curious if the pleasantness occurs in game as well.

Here in BF2, in game, there are way too many a-holes.

It seems like 97% of ppl punish for TK in game. I never punish unless its an a-hole tk'ing for a vehicle. But its not just the punish feature, most people act like jerks even though you are supposed to be on their team. Won't pick you up when you need a ride, won't let you in their chopper, takes the bomber solo when two ppl are running towards it. etc. etc.

We probably see the same group of a-holes on the forums too. It's not just totalbf2 either, any forum about bf2 is full of them.

I like to think that these are just immature little kids, it is too much of a shame to think grown-ups act like ppl do here.

Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

Why is this forums relationship with DICE/EA damaged?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment