EA responds to stats issue

[Astralman]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

I checked with EA's forum. There I posted a "keep us posted please" post. It was answered by a (current) we're still working the problem:

>> At this point the issue does not appear to be with the stats server since we are seeing stats processed. That is one of the reasons we are working with the RSPs to examine data coming from the game servers and [are investigating] the entire stat reporting process in order to resolve this. <<

I did get a promise to be kept in the information loop, on an informal basis, largely due to my being so very polite in asking. What the future holds, only Dorothy knows for sure. That little rat dog of hers isn't saying.

http://forums.easports.com/mboards/thread.jspa?threadID=239258&tstart=30

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

Be thankful, though, that at least in BF2 the ranking and unlocks don't mean much (aside from those poor souls who cannot kill sans G36E). In BF2142, without unlocks, you get no grenades, no defibs, no mines, no scope for your sniper rifle, no healing/repair/resupply 'aura' around your vehicle...nada. If the stats system in BF2142 were to go down, people who just bought the game would be taking it raw because unlike in BF2, it's much harder to compete without the unlocks. At least the BF2 unlocks are just the guns, and most of them aren't upgrades to the original anyway. BF2142's stats have gone down for a number of people for a couple of weeks, but they always came back up. I wouldn't imagine, however, that BF2's would be any more urgent than that, especially considering it's also the older game.

...I'm just still hoping for some sort of official patch to go alongside the Tampa map, stats or no stats.

~Wolfgang

[nadicus]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

Would it be wrong to kidnap "dorothy" and use any means to get the information out of her? We'll spare the dog however.

[BirdKiller]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

You think i'm full of shlt?

You were actually serious?

open your eyes, both of you. Why has it been 2weeks?

Maybe the problem is THAT difficult? Do you know the nature and detail of the problem? Do you expect that ANY and ALL problems with servers can be resolved in under one week?

Some people just can't see past the glass wall... oh well.

Some people don't realize there's nothing behind that wall and make **** up:

Do you two really think EA cares about you or I? EA is a board of people - and by that I mean a whole bunch of people sit at a table and look at how to max the flow of $$$$. BF2 had its prime and its an old game now. Why keep pumping money into a game that doesn't sell as much as it use too?

What is the percentage of these 'board of people" to the entire make up of EA's staff? You're only focusing on the top management tier who may not even have direct control of the of EA's products and services. Most of EA's staff are made up of rank-and-file members whose job is not to focus on money, but to focus on publishing and developing games. These employees work just like an average employee does: focusing on his or her given task; they don't give a damn about how EA is making money so long as it is making money to pay them. Sentience is part of this majority: does he sound like a person who cares about how his company is doing financially? It's people like him that's trying to fix this problem and providing support to this game, not the "top" who for some reason to you represent what EA is. It's people like Sentience and all other EA/DICE members that responded to us that make up of what EA is.

To say "EA is a board of people" that only cares about money implies how unfairly skewed your perception of EA is. I wonder, do you know which group of people in EA ruined your favorite C&C franchise? I doubt it, and so you blame and hate the entire EA itself instead of that specific developer/studio that created post-Westwood games. In consequence, you hate all groups that are part of EA, including those that never had any relation to C&C's post-Westwood franchise to begin with.

[JTF2_darkloop]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

What is the percentage of these 'board of people" to the entire make up of EA's staff? You're only focusing on the top management tier who may not even have direct control of the of EA's products and services. Most of EA's staff are made up of rank-and-file members whose job is not to focus on money, but to focus on publishing and developing games. These employees work just like an average employee does: focusing on his or her given task; they don't give a damn about how EA is making money so long as it is making money to pay them. Sentience is part of this majority: does he sound like a person who cares about how his company is doing financially? It's people like him that's trying to fix this problem and providing support to this game, not the "top" who for some reason to you represent what EA is. It's people like Sentience and all other EA/DICE members that responded to us that make up of what EA is.

To say "EA is a board of people" that only cares about money implies how unfairly skewed your perception of EA is. I wonder, do you know which group of people in EA ruined your favorite C&C franchise? I doubt it, and so you blame and hate the entire EA itself instead of that specific developer/studio that created post-Westwood games. In consequence, you hate all groups that are part of EA, including those that never had any relation to C&C's post-Westwood franchise to begin with.

Touche my fine featherd friend, touche!

[Astralman]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

Maybe he meant "bored of people." Yah know, I'll bet even money EA makes more dough with the John Madden series, et al, than BF 2 ever brought them. Looking at things from that angle, it might be considered nothing short of amazing they're still dealing with BF 2 at all, that is if all they're concerned about is munny.

[Verzili]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

No problem. Do also use this thread to suggest any trends or details you've seen, or noticed shortly before the outage kicked in, that might help point to a solution here. At this stage, information that leads to a fix could come from anywhere.

well a give u the things that happened when stats went down.

i had a few rounds then checked bf2 stats tracker(i use it due to the daily stats it gives you,

i have continued to play up until today,

this is what bf2 stats tracker says about my history...




also i never mentioned this before,didn't think it would be relevant but i will post it just in case it helps.

about 3 days ago i loaded up bf2 and kaspersky anti virus kept popping up a prompt saying that something(invader) was trying to take control of e5.0001,

as a precaution i denied it,but bf2 failed to load until i chose allow.

as a precaution i did a reinstall of bf2 and the problem has not came back.

entirely speculation of course but found it odd indeed.

hope this small piece of info may help a bit.

[wolverine77]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

i have noticed in the past if i shut down e5.0001 in task manger [cntrl, alt, del] BF2 will close

[eddyeddyd]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

stats=ndb 4 me

[redrider]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

Ok, I was wondering just how wide spread this might be so I looked at all the forum posts, anywhere, mainly at EA sites, about the stats thing. It seems to be affecting 99.9&#37; of all servers. It also seems to be a server side issue because there were several posts from people who were on at the time the server did a reboot. After the reboot, for most servers it was on June 14th, no stats were recorded in thier account from that server.

I also read a post from some people who were on thier, different servers and different people, server when it happened. They all said that thier servers did an update from EA, its normal to update software during the reboot process, when they rebooted. With that info in mind it looks like the server update, maybe from EA and maybe not, had some bad code in it. The code might have been bad simply by being over looked or put there, that way, on purpose. Its not important which it is, the important part is will it be fixed. I can deal with an answer, either way, I just didnt like being in the dark so I went looking to see what I could find. After finding similar info on several forums I decided to come back here and share it. . . . . . . . . . .Red

http://forums.ea.com/mboards/thread....hreadID=239587

[System]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

You were actually serious?

How many times are you going to say that? It's getting old.

Maybe the problem is THAT difficult? Do you know the nature and detail of the problem? Do you expect that ANY and ALL problems with servers can be resolved in under one week?

Ok, asides from the fact that this is probably just EA's way of seeing how many of us want the stat server - You seem to have misread what I said. I stated if this wasn't intential by EA that they left the game vulnerable. But I suppose your a fan of patches patches patches too then eh?

Some people don't realize there's nothing behind that wall and make **** up:

I'm entilted to my opinion, so it may be shlt to you friend but this is a public forum, don't be so narrow minded.

What is the percentage of these 'board of people" to the entire make up of EA's staff? You're only focusing on the top management tier who may not even have direct control of the of EA's products and services. Most of EA's staff are made up of rank-and-file members whose job is not to focus on money, but to focus on publishing and developing games. These employees work just like an average employee does: focusing on his or her given task; they don't give a damn about how EA is making money so long as it is making money to pay them. Sentience is part of this majority: does he sound like a person who cares about how his company is doing financially? It's people like him that's trying to fix this problem and providing support to this game, not the "top" who for some reason to you represent what EA is. It's people like Sentience and all other EA/DICE members that responded to us that make up of what EA is.

To say "EA is a board of people" that only cares about money implies how unfairly skewed your perception of EA is. I wonder, do you know which group of people in EA ruined your favorite C&C franchise? I doubt it, and so you blame and hate the entire EA itself instead of that specific developer/studio that created post-Westwood games. In consequence, you hate all groups that are part of EA, including those that never had any relation to C&C's post-Westwood franchise to begin with.

Woah, your wrote me a whole story there. I'll be honest, I had to skim through it but you are right. There are many jerks in EA. You are actually going to us Sentience as a respondent? That person said one thing and we've been in the dark since. And no, they didn't do it out of good will they did it to calm us down by acknowledging there is something "wrong".

You seem to visualize EA as a wonderful company - A company with no dark secrets and will hand out free chocolate bars in games one day. The fact is that they are run by a board of people. It's not a small time company, they don't care about the little things. What you don't seem to realize here is that EA is almost like microsoft - huge monopoly. When you compare the two, there isn't much of a difference is there?

What builds a great game and support is competition. EA is dominating the industry by far. What games are out there against it? CS, WoW, CoD?

[=sds=god]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

What builds a great game and support is competition. EA is dominating the industry by far. What games are out there against it? CS, WoW, CoD?"

Get off the EA D!CK... You cant even begin to compare any of those titles vs. any BF series. Iam totally against WoW, but atleast they have the support to back-up a well developed game. EA has ALWAYS released a damn near full version beta to the masses, patched the hell out of it, make the content much worse, drop support, then move on onto next POS release.
It has always been rumored that EA will drop support for stats eventually. The stats system as a whole is screwed. Sad to say, but most pay 2 play titles are now having the best support, with least amount of issues.

The only way EA is dominating any industry is its employees, ever wonder why you never hear anything else about the lawsuit by EA employees for slave labor practices.

[Vanlem]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

This has gone quite off topic, but I believe these guys ARE working on the problem and that they will have it done.

[BirdKiller]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

Woah, your wrote me a whole story there. I'll be honest, I had to skim through it but you are right. There are many jerks in EA.

Either you obviously didn't read my reply or I just missed some kind of sarcasm/joke.

You are actually going to us Sentience as a respondent? That person said one thing and we've been in the dark since. And no, they didn't do it out of good will they did it to calm us down by acknowledging there is something "wrong".

Am I supposed to point out several replies from EA/DICE members in this and EA US/UK forums? To me, they didn't do it out of good will not trying to cover the issue up due to some self-interest, instead IT'S PART OF THEIR JOB to do it, as in acknowledging and informing about it. Why wasn't that in your list of their possible motives?

You seem to visualize EA as a wonderful company - A company with no dark secrets and will hand out free chocolate bars in games one day. The fact is that they are run by a board of people.

I don't visualize EA as a wonderful company, just a normal company that doesn't have any anti-gamer conspiracy several users seem to hold now. Factor in the current attitude that "Big corporations = BAD," you have highly sensitive people criticizing these large companies on nitpicky issues that small businesses could've gotten away with.

It's not a small time company, they don't care about the little things. What you don't seem to realize here is that EA is almost like microsoft - huge monopoly. When you compare the two, there isn't much of a difference is there?

Do you even know what the definition of monopoly is and its effects? EA maybe the largest publisher in gaming, but it certainly isn't the most dominant publisher in gaming like Microsoft is in OS.

When a company is a monopoly, it can set prices and supplies on select goods at its own will without much consequence from other companies or consumers...except when they can't afford that good/service to begin with. Microsoft can, or could before, do that with its Windows OS, softwares bundled within it (driving 3rd party applications for certain tasks out), and implemented inconveniences for certain softwares (difficulty of installing Netscape to force people to convert to IE which is bundled in). EA as of right now can't: if EA raises the price of its games by $20, only its games will be raised by $20, but not all games will be raised by $20. Furthermore, other publishers and developers won't be affected by it. Even if the prices are reduced, we'll still be buying games that cost $50 or even more: we'll still be buying games based on quality and content than from price. What I just said are extremely simple examples about monopoly.

What builds a great game and support is competition. EA is dominating the industry by far. What games are out there against it? CS, WoW, CoD?

This one is irrelevant since I responded to your statement that EA is a monopoly.

[Astralman]

Re: EA responds to stats issue

I did an article about EA and it's employees for Hooked Gamers two years ago. It included interviews with programmers and their spouses. That same year, EA claimed a $3 billion profit. To put it in perspective on a profit/loss scale, which is what coroporations do ... shareholders are their only concern by the way ... Look at what you paid for the game itself. $25 to $35 bucks? It's a one-time purchase. Okay, add the possibility of the Special Forces purchase and both booster packs. You're still under $100. We don't pay for servers as players, so there's no money coming in from YOU once the purchase is made. Now, EA made $3 billion on it's entire array of games. You paid less than a hundred bucks over two years...It's not the sort of investment that speaks to power. Demanding you get more, or better, or different for such a paltry sum falls on deaf ears period, and that's the name of capitalism. That's the game EA is playing - capitalism. Apparently, they've been pretty good at it.

On an economic scale, what buy-in expenditure out of our pockets would factor into a right to make demands on a value-added scale? Not even $1000 over two years would make a dent in that. If there was a pre-arranged agreement certifying party A (EA) would provide non-funded services to party B (we the gamers), even a nickel's worth of purchase would factor into that kind of power.

The only other leverage a buyer would have would be an open-ended contractual input of money, say if players were paying $1000 a piece annually for the services provided. That would come to less than $100 a month annually, and of course multiplied by more than 300,000 players, would represent such a substantial sum, EA would be HIGHLY MOTIVATED to provide such service.

The upshot is, from what they've made from the game, the expenses required to meet the expectations of the people who've already made the purchase is throwing money down a blackhole to them, and simply not worth it. It would COST them money to provide that satisfaction. At a certain point any corporation will decide "enough is enough" and drop the product line altogether.

SO, what a lot of BF 2 players are expecting is for EA to disregard the logic they use to win the game they are actually playing - capitalism. It's simple enough to work out. It's not easy to just walk away from something in the face of it, though. For me, I've always expected BF 2 to become "legacy" software, kept alive only by the ingenuity of the diehard fans. I do like the game so much that I can't help being disappointed that we won't be seeing anything remotely akin to it in the future...kinda like a hippy realizing the sixties won't last forever.