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

[strathound]

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

You can run the game with 512. But what are your settings? What are your load times?

If I were to guess, I'd say I run it at around 70% - 75% of max resolution and options. I'll check tonight and see. But it looks damn nice and runs fast. Only down side is the load times. That's a PITA.

MS

[plantpot]

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

How is it that "The All Seeing Eye" from yahoo can be faster and more precise when finding a server? Not to mention it does multiple game platforms on the same browser, and updates and downloads to boot.

ASE is by the same people who did Qizmo, years ago, a proxy for quakeworld. It did amazing things to peoples' pings in quake beyond what ID had already done, and was just "super duper clever" all round. They really knew their network stuff. I'm guessing its therefore no small coincidence that ASE is efficient too.

and, good post vasquez. It would be interesting to hear any theories on why having compressless zip-files had no bearing on load times. that seems odd.

[Apinkmist]

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

I remember when Dice were something you rolled and took your chances with and Codes were something used by spies! To the original poster, i have no idea about all the technical talk you refer to, but if your after a job with the designers of the game, then this is the way to go about it, constructive critisism goes along way! Good luck.

[GameWizard]

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

You're all pointing fingers here, but did any of you think for a second, "why?". EA is a business... not a group of gamers that want to give back to the community. A business has only 1 objective, to survive, the only means of that is to keep their shareholders, how do they do that? They keep spitting out games and making tons of money from them.

Do you get the picture? See where WE fit in? The community? Simple answer is that we don't. EA will not invest a lot of ressources into the community as we've seen to help the community grow, mostly because the community will manage on it's own. I've seen games where the was absolutely no support from the developers, and had modding tools made for that game a year down the road.

EA are smart, they have to be if they want to be in business. As long as the world revolves around money, we'll get the short end of things. This isn't meant to make anyone feel bad, or bash EA... I'm simply stating facts and reality.

[jdrou]

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

Supernaut6,

Thanks for the information, I'll check OGRE out. To be honest, I'd never dream of writing a game engine in C#. C++ is my forte, so I will check it out. Cheers bud.

Also, you may want to look at the open-source "Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory" code and the now GPLed Quake 3 source code.

[Jesse]

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

You're all pointing fingers here, but did any of you think for a second, "why?". EA is a business... not a group of gamers that want to give back to the community. A business has only 1 objective, to survive, the only means of that is to keep their shareholders, how do they do that? They keep spitting out games and making tons of money from them.

Do you get the picture? See where WE fit in? The community? Simple answer is that we don't. EA will not invest a lot of ressources into the community as we've seen to help the community grow, mostly because the community will manage on it's own. I've seen games where the was absolutely no support from the developers, and had modding tools made for that game a year down the road.

EA are smart, they have to be if they want to be in business. As long as the world revolves around money, we'll get the short end of things. This isn't meant to make anyone feel bad, or bash EA... I'm simply stating facts and reality.

I understand what you're saying GameWizard, but also EA has to look at their competition. Yes, they're a huge publisher and have tons of money to throw around, but they also have some big names that compete for their customer's time. While they are a business and are interested in keeping their investors happy, they also have to keep their customers happy to an extent, otherwise they lose customers, which would mean lost revenue, which means unhappy investors...you get the idea. They HAVE to keep up with their competition and maintain a level of quality in games, a level of efficiency in their code, otherwise they're going to lose money and their customers and investors will look elsewhere, as there are plenty of other companies to invest in and plenty of other games that are probably more efficient and less buggy, and have more support.

The community DOES fit into the equation, but are rarely payed attention to. As a company, their main concern IS investors, IS profit, IS money. However, none of that could happen at all without us in a competitive market.

[imported_goya]

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

i blame dice/ea all the time.

[SpeedyGonzales]

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

Now, let us go on to networking. I've done a few game networking protocols in my time, the principles stay the same (in a nutshell, keep everybody updated with as little information as possible whilst staying flexible)... but what concerns me the most is the server browser... "Why do you pick on such a small item?!", I hear you cry. Notice it freeze when you click on a server? That little spinning "2" icon?

I couldnt agree more with this portion..above.

As far as the overall code of the game.. well I think as far as
EA/DICE is concerned the end result is what they were going after,
without little regard on how to get there.. I havent attempted to
examine the code itself..but from what I can tell, and what I have
heard other programmers say, is that the code is a monster cluster-f***.

BF2 is a pretty good game.. not the best I have ever played.. but since
its the flavor of the month, I will play it until it gets boring...which wont
take too long, as usual with most EA games.. with only 11-12 maps,
half of which are junk, imo.

EA is obviously a company that shows its greed with a huge sh*t-eating
grin.. I mean.. lets face it... the game was unfinished when it was
released..even though they knew wayyyyyyy beforehand of several
major bugs and flaws... hell they had the demo out for a month, and
still didnt fix the problems that were being reported.. no, instead
they released.... and why? well to get our money, NOW.

In addition to that, they only include 11-12 maps with it.. so
you know theyre going after another 30 bucks later for some
'expansion pack' Other major titles, like UT2004 have 10 new
maps released daily..all free..EA would never imagine of letting
us write our own in any huge numbers.. Also, they got this ranked
and unranked B.S... which is a total scam, when you take a look
at these game server providers charging more for ranked.. as if it
requires more bandwidth than an unranked, which it doesnt..

I got to admit, I came from Unreal series games... hooked on them
since UT99.. been in the UT community for 6 years.. and the differance
between EPIC and EA is like night and day.. EPIC supports its titles..
very aggressively.. EA takes the 'we're working on it....' approach
whenever something needs attention.. patches for Unreal series games
DO NOT take 3 months.. and EPIC basically tells its customers..
'Hey buy our game.. feel free to add to it, change it, make mods, skins,
vehicles, maps for it all you want..' EA is too busy trying to protect
the sanctity of their precious ranks and stats system by instituting
rules, and regulations by the dozen to do so.. thats sad.

But like I said, until it gets boring.. I will continue to play..but I
seriously doubt I will ever purchase another EA title, after having
to pay to beta test this one for them..

[wartorn]

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

To the original poster - I believe you are significantly underestimating the scale and degree of task that is involved in creating as complex a title as battlefield 2.

To take a simple example, I concede that socket programming isn't very complicated when you can rely on established APIs. But DICE can't afford to do that - they have to squeeze every ounce of performance out of their networking code. They can't rely on a general solution, they need a very specific one. Even if they are using the DirectX libraries there is likely a significant chunk of customized code which may be written in assembler. And this isn't retrieving a result set from a remote DB, this is synchronizing up to 64 streams of asynchronous data in real-time.

Our field is still young; compared to architects and civil engineers we still have to bake our own bricks and our most advanced tool is a hammer at best. That a program as complex as BF2 has as few bugs as it does is a noteworthy accomplishment. Cut them some slack.

[Vasquez]

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

To the original poster - I believe you are significantly underestimating the scale and degree of task that is involved in creating as complex a title as battlefield 2.

To take a simple example, I concede that socket programming isn't very complicated when you can rely on established APIs. But DICE can't afford to do that - they have to squeeze every ounce of performance out of their networking code. They can't rely on a general solution, they need a very specific one. Even if they are using the DirectX libraries there is likely a significant chunk of customized code which may be written in assembler. And this isn't retrieving a result set from a remote DB, this is synchronizing up to 64 streams of asynchronous data in real-time.

I am more than aware of the differences between retrieving a result-set from a database and game-networking-engines. I believe the basic Win32 Socket API with I/O completion ports is more than capable of handling 64 streams of asynchronous real-time data. Probably potentially more. I very much doubt they by-passed the Win32 networking API, it would be far more trouble than it's worth. And buggy. And potentially a security-threat.

Our field is still young; compared to architects and civil engineers we still have to bake our own bricks and our most advanced tool is a hammer at best. That a program as complex as BF2 has as few bugs as it does is a noteworthy accomplishment. Cut them some slack.

I'll cut slack to those who deserve slack. BF2 has been built over a codebase that was first released in BF1942. This latest incarnage is potentially a kludge of the preceeding codebases.

And with regard to the comparison to architects and civil engineers... at least with them I'd probably get compensation when the house they designed falls apart around my ears

[SpeedyGonzales]

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

FACT: The game was incomplete when it was sold to me..

FACT: 3 months later, it was still unfinished.

These are really the only facts I need to know about to pass judgement
on EA as a game publisher.. I wont be buying any more EA products.

And to the person who said 'what other game gives you what bf2 does..'
PLENTY.....PLENTY... Heres an example; UT1999 has been out for 6
years and there are still a thousand servers playing it.. why? because
EPIC supports their game, and their community..and mappers, modders,
etc are still making maps and mods for it every day.. on the other hand,
EA sells me a incomplete product.. takes forever to release a patch fixing
the hundreds of bugs, then expects me to buy an expansion pack later
on? LMFAO. Dont think so.

We can argue all day about whether EA/DICE are worth a crap... but
it wont change the fact that they will never get any of my money again..
and at my local gamestop, out of the first 100 copies of BF2 that were
sold after release... 45 were returned to the store for incompatibility
reasons... their losses , not mine. BF2 will be another BFV.. it will slip
away into oblivion.. especially with such limited maps..

EA is not supporting BF2 like they should.. its on the bottom of
their list, apparently.. if this was Madden 06' we were playing right now,
Im guessing we would have seen much more and much quicker support.

[Jesse]

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

BF2 will be another BFV.. it will slip
away into oblivion.. especially with such limited maps..

I don't know if I can agree with you on that statement. I agree the game is very buggy and unacceptable, but going as far to say another BFV is a little far. Now, the expansion pack, I look for it to go the way of the BF1942 expansions. The only reason I have Road to Rome is because it was bundled with 1942 for like, 20 bucks at Wal-Mart when a friend of mine told me about Desert Combat and I decided to give it a try. (been playing the series since).

DC, and all other mods, are why I don't agree with you. EA's support is worth about as much as a feather in a sword fight, but the rather plain maps, annoying features, lack of features there-of....these things will be corrected by multiple mods. They'll do everything they can with what they have access to in the game engine, and pester EA to get as much more access to the game as possible. I know I'd like to see more of the commander assets code opened up to mods as I see the commader assets as detrimental to gameplay, but that's another debate. Bottom line is I think the game, or at least the engine, will show it's true abilities once competent teams get their products (mods) to us.

[Capt.Hook]

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

First of all, an interesting and well-written original post Vasquez, and thoughtful replies from most people. Just as a side note, have you noticed that the people who reply with 'flames' and other general crap or 5 word answers can't write? Don't know what spelling is or punctuation, or even what a paragraph is if there are in fact enough words to warrant one.

Back to the subject, interesting points about the 'cheap' construction of the game or what is a premium price for us to pay for it. To those of you who say 'you bought it its great shut up' If it was a car, made out of cheap parts that unless you paid for engine upgrades from new would drive all jumpy and slow. Would you buy it for a premium price? Stupid question I know, because we all here have bought it. (That and most cars are!)

The thing is, why is it like this? as was mentioned, lack of time I think is most likely of culprits. Why? Well as rightly said by Gamewizard, business is business and we have all seen reports (faked or not) from ex-EA employees and contractors about their slave driving and unfair treatment. As said EA is a business and they are into making money.

They conquer and devide. Does it matter if they do not keep you the consumer happy? How many EA games have been like this in the past yet despite their reputation we still consume. Truth is, they really don't have much competition for you the consumer to choose from when it comes to supposed 'top end games.' Who are you going to turn to if you don't by a game with EA's influence in it and the accompanying poor support?

[Vasquez]

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

The thing is, why is it like this? as was mentioned, lack of time I think is most likely of culprits. Why? Well as rightly said by Gamewizard, business is business and we have all seen reports (faked or not) from ex-EA employees and contractors about their slave driving and unfair treatment. As said EA is a business and they are into making money.

The quality of EA games is, thankfully, a minority. Many people say that it's the "norm", but I disagree. Out of all the PC games I've bought, it's only been EA games that I've had the slightest bit of difficulty with, and even then mostly the BF series (the original BF1942 demo wouldn't even run on my computer...). And BF2 has definately been the worst of all time. How much of this is EA's fault and how much is DICE's, well, only DICE know. GameWizard mentioned that they have to stay in business and do what they have to. Other companies manage to do it without causing so much difficulty to their customers. EA will have their day, I'm sure of it. Probably in a merger...

As for why it's like this, it's because we're consumer-whores. We know that cool looking "boston tea-party" cocktail is going to brain us in the morning, but, "goddamn it, I'm having two". When the game is working in tip top condition, there is immense fun to be had. That is the truth.

It's just the sour package that surrounds that fun-sweet centre that leaves a bitter taste on the tongue.

[SpeedyGonzales]

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

First of all, an interesting and well-written original post Vasquez, and thoughtful replies from most people. Just as a side note, have you noticed that the people who reply with 'flames' and other general crap or 5 word answers can't write? Don't know what spelling is or punctuation, or even what a paragraph is if there are in fact enough words to warrant one.

Back to the subject, interesting points about the 'cheap' construction of the game or what is a premium price for us to pay for it. To those of you who say 'you bought it its great shut up' If it was a car, made out of cheap parts that unless you paid for engine upgrades from new would drive all jumpy and slow. Would you buy it for a premium price? Stupid question I know, because we all here have bought it. (That and most cars are!)

The thing is, why is it like this? as was mentioned, lack of time I think is most likely of culprits. Why? Well as rightly said by Gamewizard, business is business and we have all seen reports (faked or not) from ex-EA employees and contractors about their slave driving and unfair treatment. As said EA is a business and they are into making money.

They conquer and devide. Does it matter if they do not keep you the consumer happy? How many EA games have been like this in the past yet despite their reputation we still consume. Truth is, they really don't have much competition for you the consumer to choose from when it comes to supposed 'top end games.' Who are you going to turn to if you don't by a game with EA's influence in it and the accompanying poor support?

If I had to guess here..I'd guess that DICE wasnt exactly ready for
full release while EA was pressuring for its completion.. "Oh we'll
release a patch fixing those things.." mentality..

3 months later, that patch is FINALLY released fixing most of the major
bugs and flaws.. Like I said before, my local gamestop had 45 returns
of BF2 within the first 30 days after release.. Having worked at this very
same store years ago, I cannot remember EVER seeing such a return
rate of a game before..

They might release a few mods, expansion packs, etc making the game's
lifespan longer.. but I wont be buying any of them.. The memory leak
issue affected me for weeks after this game came out.. dozens and
dozens of crashes.. I wont give them the benefit of the doubt next time,
because there wont be one..

Vasquez, I couldnt agree more with your last post..