Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

[jayhigh]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

I know I'm going to get a whole bunch of flames for this post, perhaps along the lines of:

"If you don't like it, don't play it" (But I do like it, but I also like voicing my opinion...)
"Think you could do better idiot?!" (If I had the time, perhaps...)
"Upgrade your hardware f00l!" (I have good hardware, but please read...)

EA/DICE do have a good product. I had to rant a little because they've evidently not thought about some principles that a commercial game in this day and age, should really be exhibiting.


Rant off, I'm waiting for the flames, and I'll respond as best I can. Peace out :)

I do not say this too often, but
STFU !
what other games out there offer what BF2 has to offer?
good graphics, online play, team play, 50+ players online, multitude of vehicles... not a easy game to develop given everyone's resources.
if you dont like this game, do not play.
apprieciate what you do have.

i would be bored out of my mind with CS:S and AA rite now if bf2 did not EXIST!

[HF_Martini6]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

thats right jayhigh but we (or most of us) spend 50 bucks or more for this piece of Software and we're all spending a lot of time with it-
The Point is, if you buy something and use it for a longer period, wouldn't you complain about errors and ask for Solutions?

I think everyone would.

[imported_DytHlt]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

in response to jayhigh and in correspondence with HF_Martini6:

I love the game, It's great, I appreciate what they gave us. But I still think they could have done better. The Graphics are not really as good as people say. The reflections (or lack therof) suck. The water is decent, but could be much better. Go play Half Life 2 on Max Details then play BF2 on max. Yes, BF2 graphics are good, but they are not as good as they could be with the current times. And of course, this probably comes down to the lack of efficiency in the game engine, as Vasquez said.

If you have a problem with the game, it's never going to get fixed unless the developers know that you want it fixed.

Great Topic and post Vasquez, one of the best, most truthful, and eye opening that i've seen on these forums.

[motorboatJones]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

I'm not a programmer but I tend to agree with the original poster. I have a fast rig with 2GBs of ram yet every game I play I always get lag the first 30 secs of play. I can play a map, that round ends and goes to a map I don't like so I will find another server with the same map I was playing before. You'd think that since I had just played it it would not lag when it loads, but it does.

Half-Life 2 on the other hand never lagged. It looks just as good if not better than BF2. Both use DirectX.

[_X_]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

maybe solution to zip files is to "rezip" them with no compresion?

[sdm151]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

I do not say this too often, but
STFU !
what other games out there offer what BF2 has to offer?

And somehow the profundity of this question precludes anyone from making a well reasoned argument against the quality of said game. Moron. If you are too dense to understand someone else's thoughts, then just keep your infantile remarks to yourself.

[Vasquez]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

Would this explain memory leakage? In the rare lapses of time I've played BF2 for more than 4 hours straight, I notice my fps has dropped from 45 to 35 on average... (I have a 6800GT at Ultra clockings, 2 gigs RAM and AMD 3500+ processory, so its not me.)

Yes, it probably does explain memory-leaks. In my original post I mentioned resource management. One of the tasks of a resource manager, when memory gets low, is to get rid of items from the cache that it doesn't think it needs, to free up memory. Of course, there are times on low-end machines whereby you get stuck because you need everything in the cache (think intensive CQB with all different manner of vehicles, infantry and weapons)... then you just gotta suck it up. 1gb should be more than enough for BF2.

One other thing I'm having trouble grasping is why more memory helps online games... it should make no difference from an online perspective.

An example of an efficient engine would be somethign like Half life 2, no? It can run levels with more detail, better graphical and audio quality (smaller levels though) at double the fps of BF2 on my comp.

Yes, HF2 is a good example of an efficient engine. But, they spent years on it as opposed to rushing it. I wonder if the hackers who stole their code were actually despondent DICE members, but there we go

Another good example is GTA San Andreas. This kind of game should (theoretically) be more of a hog than BF2 considering all the stuff that can be going on. But they carry it off very well. Their resource manager is excellent also, streaming in the parts of the map as it is needed, pretty much (at least on my PC) seamlessly. You don't notice the resource manager working behind the scenes, and that's how it should be.

[Vasquez]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

maybe solution to zip files is to "rezip" them with no compresion?

This would be an interesting exercise. When I get home tonight I'm going to have a bit of play and see if BF2 can play nicely with:

a) No-compression zip folders
b) Regular folders

(b) is a long shot, BUT, once again it depends on how they open their zip file... if they go through some sort of ZIP API, then I'm outta luck. But during development, I'm guessing things were not in ZIP folders (would be a pain to continually tweak, rezip, load, tweak, rezip, load), so it may recogniser a folder...

I'll post back with results.

[Vasquez]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

I do not say this too often, but
STFU !

If my post makes you say that, I'm betting you say it far more than you're letting on...

not a easy game to develop given everyone's resources.

This is where I disagree. Sure, for a garage-programmer it would take some time to do. For a well-funded team of engineers, it shouldn't. And I'm only referring to the time it takes to do a decent 3D engine.

As for the rest of it, sorry, but it's not rocket science to make a game like BF2. Especially given their funding. To you it may seem like the most complex beast to create on the planet. To others, it's not.

if you dont like this game, do not play.
apprieciate what you do have.

Perhaps you didn't read the very start of my post (or perhaps you did...). I do like the game, but feel that it would be much better given just a little bit more time and effort and less bandaids over leaking wounds.

[Morg]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

I totally agree with the original poster - especially the part about the server browser. It behaves as if it has been coded by an intern with no previous experience in network code...

The server browser problem is basic stuff. Nothing new, something you can achieve by using standard libraries without much effort which makes it even more embarassing for EA.

[imported_rhohan]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

not a easy game to develop given everyone's resources.

i tend to disagree. in the example of the source engine (with the exception of hdr, dod:s, but if you disable hdr in dod:s, that it falls into my example). It is the ONLY engine i know of, where i can run at 1600x1200 @6xaa and 16xaf and get 135fps on the stress test, AND, my buddy, who has a athlonxp 3200+, 512 megs of ram, and a friggin geforce 3 ti-200, can play it at 60fps+ as well. It scales THAT WELL.

[big_sammy_b]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

i think thats absolutley right i said from the begining that BF2 was very poorly coded.

I fired up quake 4 last night for the first time and the graphics are breathtaking compared too BF2 and yet i can run it on very high at 1280x1024 with 2x AA much higher than BF2 and yet i get as good if not better fps. Makes you wonder ...

[GameWizard]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

You're looking at this the wrong way, sure it may be that DICE has lousy coding, but why do you think it got released that way? I'm pretty damn sure that DICE can produce far better code than that, EA had pressured them into an early release. They never had time to perfect their code.

Remember their little extension they got for 6 months, just imagine what the game would of been like if they had released at that time. Would be like walking around with a bunch of organs missing.

[Vasquez]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

You're looking at this the wrong way, sure it may be that DICE has lousy coding, but why do you think it got released that way? I'm pretty damn sure that DICE can produce far better code than that, EA had pressured them into an early release. They never had time to perfect their code.

Remember their little extension they got for 6 months, just imagine what the game would of been like if they had released at that time. Would be like walking around with a bunch of organs missing.

I agree with you about the pressure from EA, hell I think I did a post on it. But (and I know this is a little thing), things such as the server browser net code running on the UI thread (as it appears to act). That's not something that crops up due to pressure near the crunch-point, it's a fundamental design flaw right from the word go...

[Berrern]

Re: Why EA is not entirely to blame for the lack of foresight that is BF2

Interesting thread, I agree 100% with you Vasquez!

This would be an interesting exercise. When I get home tonight I'm going to have a bit of play and see if BF2 can play nicely with:

a) No-compression zip folders
b) Regular folders

I'm a bit bored at work here at the moment, so I did some tests myself.
First of all, alternative b) doesn't work. When you try to connect, and the map-load screen is supposed to come up, you crash to desktop immediately.

I also tried alternative a), in which I uncompressed the files and made a new zip out of them - this time with no compression. Comparing the "normal" files, and my new zip files, they turned out to be 2-3x as big.

Anyway, I tested both Karkand and Fushe pass (Fushe is the biggest map, at 68MB (160 with the new file)) offline. I didn't dare to go online with the modified archives, as I'm too afraid of PB and bans.
I first tested with the standard files, then turned off BF2, replaced the files, and tested again. I did this twice for each map.

I used a stopwatch for exact time, and started it just as the map-load screen came - and stopped it when the Client Verification was finished.

The times for Karkand was:
Normal files: 38.0s and 39.0s
Large files: 38.0s and 38.4s

And for Fushe Pass:
Normal files: 42.7s and 40.5s
Large files: 42.6s and 39.6s

It doesn't seem like theres any point in re-compressing the files as it wont improve your load times.
If someone with a little more PB knowledge could test it online too, that'd be nice!