So why isnt BF2 more popular?

[Dairuka]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

people are simply attracted to whatever is most popular.

Thats my reasoning for why Karkand is so popular.

take Paris Hilton for example. what a stupid slvt that isn't really all that hot, but everyone LOVES reading about/watching her. sheer popularity is hard to overcome.

Thats why I keep saying that Karkand is the Paris Hilton of BF2 maps. :laugh:

I think you're probably right, as already a couple mates have picked up new computers this past year, and today's 'average' new PC can play at least at a low or medium graphics quality.

Hopefully they were smart and did their homework before shopping.

Buying a computer is exactly like Buying a House, a Car, a Motorcycle or a Boat. You damn well better do your homework before you go off to the store to buy one. If you don't, you'll be a sucker and end up spending $1200 US dollars on a computer that'll be obselete in three months.

I like to help my own friends out by keeping their eyes open to great deals on Computer Parts, and Pre-built computers that meet my exceptionally high Cost:Efficiency ratio and standards.

If they don't listen to me and they buy a 2.5ghz Celeron because it was only $300, then I just laugh at them and say that they deserve to suffer.

It was not my thinking that it was EA's fault for this, it was just that back in 2005 the hardware requirements were steep, but like you say as long as there are servers available people will come on board because the same hardware is much cheaper today. And the price of the game has already dropped considerably in the stores as well.

Despite naysayer's warnings, BF2 is actually increasing in popularity as of right now.

However, BF2 would certainly re-latch onto the attention of it's old and diehard fanbase by fixing some of the things that are still broken in BF2. Just like with the release of Jalalabad, you'd be able to draw in huge crowds of people, and hundreds of new servers within days.

[TheToeCutter]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

yeah, i'd have to say the "not enough juice" argument is outdated. perhaps it held things back in the beginning, butas Dairuka indicates <$600 can get you a decent performing machine to get it accomplished at medium settings and 50+ fps.

Just to be the devil's advocate though... you and I and a lot of folks on this board probably don't mind buying a new computer every couple of years, or upgrading. However there are lots of people, (many of my married friends) that don't use their PC for gaming, and the need for upgrading is more like every 3-5 years, or even longer in some cases. A machine from 4 years ago will still run Office fine, and email, browser etc.. It is games that push the envelope on system requirements.

Sometimes the actual $ for the upgrade is less the problem than getting everything setup correctly, files and apps moved over, etc. etc.. And for those that are not as IS proficient it can be a daunting task.

[Dairuka]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

Sometimes the actual $ for the upgrade is less the problem than getting everything setup correctly, files and apps moved over, etc. etc.. And for those that are not as IS proficient it can be a daunting task.

That is why every circle of 'online gamers' has a 'computer guru.'

The computer guru's job is to make sure that his friends always get the best deals, on the best computer hardware that he 'knows' is compatible.

The computer guru is omnipotent in his ability to keep his friend's computers clean, merely by helping them tweak, and upkeep their computer with simple step by step instructions over E-mail, Instant Messaging, or VOIP.

If you were really serious about getting your friends to start online gaming, then you'll have to teach yourself all of the nuances with computer hardware. You will have to keep up with the ever changing world of technology to weed out the 'potential flops' from the 'potential godsends.'

In short, if you really want to get your non-PC gaming friends to become serious online gamers, then you will have to be the computer guru.

[TheToeCutter]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

In short, if you really want to get your non-PC gaming friends to become serious online gamers, then you will have to be the computer guru.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Unfortunatley I have been that person for the last 10-15 years, and to be quite honest it is a thankless job, and I sort of quit. It all began with Duke Nuke'em and Quake 1...

Last year my parents (in their 60's) got their FIRST computer, and they are now my full-time gig.

[Solodon]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

They have to provide servers a daylight version of those special forces maps. That one change alone, simple to do would reinvigorate the SF maps usage. How many people even play them now? Its too darn dark.

[SERIALBUTCHER]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

I think making SF under the BF2 servers would be great idea...

But i dont know what the problem is, there are like 300 servers full at one time, the population doesnt seem to matter on normal BF, however a lot of people have turned to point whoring.

This only bothers people because it makes the high ranks have worse stats than the point whorers lol, for example a medic on 24/7 karkand can make 2.5SPM fairly easily, but that is higher than most ranks with over 70k points.

Just find a generally sound server and stick with it :)

Ohhh and BF2 and BF2142 are two different games, appeal to different people, of course on the BF2 forums people will say BF2142 sucks lol.

It is nice to have a high spm, but I think it is far from the most important stat

I put k/d ratio, gold medals, w/l ratio, & flag caps/defends before spm

My spm on my main account is 2.2, but it is 3.46 on my AN_800#_GORILLA account (IO, & just a test account)

It tickles me when the "stat whores" "go off" thinking they are "1337" because they have a new account, & play in IO exclusively on only 1 map, w/ 1 weapon, & aren't even bothering to get any badges, medals, ribbons or flags

There is more than 1 stat in this game

Just my humble opinion

Lieutenant General |SI| SERIALBUTCHER

peace:)

Wow, I didn't think BF2's minimum specs were that low. That was probably the top of the line back in 03'... It's still playable, but I'm betting that, thats a bargain basement computer from Dell these days. $500 max. Crappy monitor included.

Medium end to me would look a little more like this:

Antec - Sonata II Case
Asus V8N series Motherboard, (Only 1 AGP or PCI-E slot. Not SLi Compatible.)
AMD Athlon 64 2500+, (Can be overclocked to run like a 3200+.)
eVGA GeForce 6600GT (AGP or PCI-E) (128mb or 256mb),
1GB Corsair/Kingston DDR (PCI 2700 333mhz or PCI 3200 400mhz) (2 x 512mb or 1 x 1gb) RAM.

You could probably buy all the aforementioned parts seperately for about $550 US. You could probably put that together with your old computer's, Hard Drive, Floppy Drive, and CD/DVD-R Drive, and use your old computer's Monitor without any hitches, although you might also want to throw in an extra $80 for a cheap heatsink and a couple of fans if you plan to overclock it.

Voila, there you have it, for less than a PS3, you have a medium end computer that could run BF2 on high settings without any issues. You could probably also play Doom 3 and Oblivion without any problems as well.

Ummmm......You are always full of good advice Dairuka, but I have 2 PC's, 1 w/ a 6800GT, & the other w/ a 6600GT (256mb), both w/ sata RAID0 HDD arrays, & 2 gigs of ram

3700+ in the main, & 3000+ in the "back up"

I don't even run my 6800GT 400/1100 @ high settings, it would handle it 95% of the time, but it would "lag" @ the worst possible moment (right in the middle of some intense CQC)

But I do agree w/ 90% of everything else you say LOL

LG SB

peace:)

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

Wow, I didn't think BF2's minimum specs were that low. That was probably the top of the line back in 03'... It's still playable, but I'm betting that, thats a bargain basement computer from Dell these days. $500 max. Crappy monitor included.

LOL. We dont have Dells nor HP´s here. Its not Canadaland nor USA. This is Eastern Europe and the keyword is "import and build cost".

The PC was bought at-

P4 3.0 Prescott with Hyper Threading
Some cheap Asus MB
2X 256MB of RAM (BIOS shows them going at 233Mhz)
ATI Radeon 9550 Second Edition (128 MB)
Mouse, KB and all the dandy stuff, for ~7000 EEK, which was about 500- 550 USD.

Note the upgrade on the card which was bought this August. No notable FPS difference here, and I know its because of the lack of RAM.

Anyway, set was bought ´05 June, especially and just for outcoming BF2 at a "reasonable" price.

Not really looking to upgrade it either. Unless the upgrade "season" starts this Winter when airsoft season is closed. I personally was looking to get extra RAM, but an Aimpoint RD sight with some metal G&G magazines for my M733 were a better bargain :p .

The point was- PCs running on minimum arent really obselete, as they are used now and will be used for at least 2-4 years to come. Im competitive with the rig Ive got and there are only 3 reasons that are holding my skill evolution back- lack of RAM, bad mouse (400dpi) and living in Eastern Europe, 140 milliseconds away from New York.

Medium end to me would look a little more like this:

Antec - Sonata II Case
Asus V8N series Motherboard, (Only 1 AGP or PCI-E slot. Not SLi Compatible.)
AMD Athlon 64 2500+, (Can be overclocked to run like a 3200+.)
eVGA GeForce 6600GT (AGP or PCI-E) (128mb or 256mb),
1GB Corsair/Kingston DDR (PCI 2700 333mhz or PCI 3200 400mhz) (2 x 512mb or 1 x 1gb) RAM.

Im planning to add additional RAM to this rig, a 5.1 sound system, G15 and G5 and thats it. The rig isnt really my own, it belongs to my little brother but as I plan to build my own system somewhere after February, Im sure going to need all the advice I can get. And yeah... since Ive got my eye on TM MP7, with all the upgrades its probably going to be a "budget gaming computer".

Voila, there you have it, for less than a PS3, you have a medium end computer that could run BF2 on high settings without any issues. You could probably also play Doom 3 and Oblivion without any problems as well.

Doom3 and Oblivion run with no problems on my rig as it is, and was with 9550. Im actually amazed that up to now, with Crysis coming out, I didnt actually feel the need to upgrade it anywhere. I mean, the need as in "sh!t I cant play this game!".

In all honesty, I am all but a graphics whore, I just need FPS enough to not to actually feel the lack of it. And with BF2 patching, I lost all of that "comfortable gaming feeling" which starts only at 50 FPS.


:::: To all smartasses who say that human eye cant make the difference after 28 FPS, practice and real life show that you REALLY wont FEEL any difference after 50.

[Ottobon]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

Sometimes i also wonder about the demographic playing BF2, would it be safe to say that the average age is probably older than a game such as CS?

the thing that gets to me is stuff like this http://www.serverspy.net/site/stats/mods.html?g=27 (click stats) although if it is played by older people than i suppose thats justifiable as college students have finals(me) and adults have christmas/Family etc to deal with

well and of course 2142

looking at that my point is somewhat contridicted as it seems that their are less people who play BF2, but the people who do play seem to play more often, so does that mean people with CS have a life and we dont? No, instead i think it means we know a 1 night stand from a sweetheart, at the same rate I'm on a forum talking about a videogame when i should really be studying for my exams, hmm

[zipp0r]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

i can give many reasons why people would rather play something else, but i dont want to write an essay :P

it comes down to things like:
tk's and the tk system
greifers
not enough of the popular vehicles
very very poor weapons
no fast strafing
choke point battles are rare, due to flag hopping
commander mode is a cheat

and many more :laugh:

:::: To all smartasses who say that human eye cant make the difference after 28 FPS, practice and real life show that you REALLY wont FEEL any difference after 50.

i disagree, i can easily feel and see the difference in responsiveness and smoothness at any fps upto around 100-125max

id buy a new gfx card if i was only getting 50fps :laugh:

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

I wont argue that number Zip. Hell, at least its above 28.

[DesertFalcon]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

Vanilla BF2 would be at least a little more successful if they would:

- Introduce free maps that would include the following:
- PLA City Maps
- PLA vs MEC Maps
- Infantry Only specific maps on 16/32/64 playered map modes.

- Balance current 64 player maps which pose problems, that would include the following:
- The closeness of Wake Island's Carrier and Airbases, which allows for easy airbase/carrier raping.
- The lack of flags on Zatar Wetlands that would allow the USMC to get out of the Canyon trap.
- The Closeness of Operation Clean Sweep's Airbases, which allows for easy airbase raping.
- The eye burning glare of Dragon Valley's sky.
- Include the removal Sharqui's northern MEC uncappable to allow USMC to cause ticket bleed on the MEC forces without having to defend 100% of their flags. Either that or make the southern MEC uncappable a cappable flag, so the USMC can fight back.

- Introduce extra incentives, awards or medals to players who play on the least popular maps for both Vehicle and Infantry Only modes. I'd recommend ideas, but this is a touchy subject which could be seen as a nerf or a boost, depending on your particular affinity for a certain brown stage with lots of fog.

excellent idea but you forgot to mention the j-10

[Screaming_Bunny]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

P4 3.0
512MB RAM
ATI R 9600

Running all on low when playing infantry, effects and geometry on high when airbourne. They arent really that low specs. 20- 30 FPS is playable for me, but a nightmare for most.

Ummm, yeah, that is low specs. No new game will play on this rig well.

Are we talking CS or CS:S? If we are talking CS:S, then you are wrong on the specs. HL2 needed some pretty high specs at the time remember.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

Ummm, yeah, that is low specs. No new game will play on this rig well.

Are we talking CS or CS:S? If we are talking CS:S, then you are wrong on the specs. HL2 needed some pretty high specs at the time remember.

You underestimate the power of such a rig. I ran HL2 with medium settings across the board with high on some settings. There is no game that I cannot play right now (that are relased) except for the newest Splinter Cell I think, and the GWAR or whatever the name was. The thing is though, I dont get to enjoy the graphical pleasures .

[AnotherEd]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

i can give many reasons why people would rather play something else, but i dont want to write an essay :P

it comes down to things like:
tk's and the tk system
greifers
not enough of the popular vehicles
very very poor weapons
no fast strafing
choke point battles are rare, due to flag hopping
commander mode is a cheat

and many more :laugh:

while we in the community might be more harsh on such things specifically, generally speaking the masses won't care about such nuances for their initial assesment of liking/disliking the game.

i mean, when was the last time you heard someone say "ya know i really thought that BF2 game would rock, but the way that MP7 performed made me just give up on it all" or "darn those commanders, they see everything! they are hackers, i'm out!"

---

also i'm a big fan of the 30+fps believers. but i understand that is a minimum fps for the most extreme lag prone situations. getting a machine to perform at higher fps is great, it only ensures that during those critical moments, you still get at least 30. but claiming you can tell the difference between 50fps and 100fps on the same exact scene/situation/load, i find silly.

i use a general rule of thumb of twice the minimum for average performance. if i can get a machine to perform at 60fps generally then chances are it'll handle the most intensive moments at 30+ also. i think Dairuka's <$600 specs clearly meet that ideal at medium settings.

---

i see what TheToeCutter is trying to say about non-avid gamers not doing upgrades/new computer purchases anywhere near the rate we do. however, the argument in general is that people with average computers bought today will easily be able to play bf2.

so as of today, the hardware requirements are just not a concern. it does speak for the initial acceptance factor though.

obviously the reason BF2 is not more popular is clearly an involved question with many possible reasons for many different people. but really, i guess i'd be more interested to hear why people like CS so much! CS is really the only FPS that outdoes BF2 as far as regular player counts. i'd take the time to go and read some CS forums, but seriously, have any of you ever tried that? yikes. i'd rather go spend time with kindergarten kids. any of you have some mature CS forums you know about we could use to garner some more info?

[zipp0r]

Re: So why isnt BF2 more popular?

while we in the community might be more harsh on such things specifically, generally speaking the masses won't care about such nuances for their initial assesment of liking/disliking the game.

i mean, when was the last time you heard someone say "ya know i really thought that BF2 game would rock, but the way that MP7 performed made me just give up on it all" or "darn those commanders, they see everything! they are hackers, i'm out!"

---

also i'm a big fan of the 30+fps believers. but i understand that is a minimum fps for the most extreme lag prone situations. getting a machine to perform at higher fps is great, it only ensures that during those critical moments, you still get at least 30. but claiming you can tell the difference between 50fps and 100fps on the same exact scene/situation/load, i find silly.

hm im not sure on that, i think i did a poll and even alot of people here know that the guns are quite lame. and any new player could easily work that out the first time they tried to shoot someone. then not long after they realise that players are coming to find him when they are hidden, but have been spotted by commander scan.

is your computer capable of 100fps ? i'll repeat again why its easy to tell the difference, "i can easily feel and see the difference in responsiveness and smoothness at any fps upto around 100-125max" things like mouse lag, not being able to get your x-hair on the other player instantly e.t.c