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

[WarGimp]

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

So when do they patch it in..... heh.

When EA tells 'em to. They are NOT allowed to work on anything until EA gives them the go-ahead. It's EA's money paying for their time and believe me EA are time Natzis!

EA isn't going to fire anyone - they own more than 50% of the DICE (someone on these boards mentioned as much as 65% ownership).

BF2 has already made too much money, nevermind the console port, for EA to think that DICE somehow isn't effective or that the title doesn't have any longevity.

Don't be too sure about that. Some nasty things happen in this industry. I remember when Seirra dessolved Dynamix (one of the most famous dev houses in it's day) right after releasing Tribes 2. The Intelectual Properties of the BF games belong to EA. At a whim, they can hand the who thing over to anyone they choose. The fact that they own Dice makes it even worse... they can pull the plug at any time.

Wargimp is the man...someone who must actually work in the real world with real deadlines and real budgets

Thanks

Actually, I've been involved with (and abused by) the games industry for about 10 years. The industry as a whole is in a really bad state. It's almost impossible to get a start up going and when you do, companies like EA like to step on you to make sure you don't compete with them. Since I don't much like working for the big guy, it leaves me in an icky space.

[vbl]

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

Don't be too sure about that. Some nasty things happen in this industry. I remember when Seirra dessolved Dynamix (one of the most famous dev houses in it's day) right after releasing Tribes 2. The Intelectual Properties of the BF games belong to EA. At a whim, they can hand the who thing over to anyone they choose. The fact that they own Dice makes it even worse... they can pull the plug at any time.

The Tribes series never enjoyed even half of the fanbase that the Battlefield games have accrued.

Sadly, I was one of the people who loved Tribes 2, too.

[strathound]

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

I'm going to chime in on the Wargimp side of this fence. When I was in school studying Computer Science, our school started a gaming curriculum. Several of my friends and I took that experience and tried to write a simple game. We poured hours upon hours into this little project. And while it was great fun and tremendously rewarding, reality has a way of bringing you back down to earth. All we have to show for it is some cool APIs and some prototype code.

Writing a game is hard, even if you are using the api's that are available today (which we didn't have, we wrote the networking stuff ourselves in C and the video stuff in Assembly.) Developers consistently underestimate what it's going to take to get something done. And this thread is a perfect example. Don't assume something is easy until you've done it yourself.

A few other points. When you say "this code sucks" or "it shouldn't have to use 1 Gig of RAM" or "Game X doesn't use that much RAM", you aren't actually doing any real analysis. If I'm designing a game like this where FPS is crucial and you want high graphic detail, you are going to want to cache as much of that stuff in memory as you possibly can. From a FPS standpoint, it's the best option. The original poster is correct that you can provide Just In Time algorithms to do this without using as much memory. And I am by no means trying to convince you people that the code is good (because I haven't seen it and I haven't analyzed the design in detail.) But you might want to see some numbers before making such a judgement. BF2 may have many more textures to store per level / map than the FPS in question. Until you know the details, it's really pointless to guess.

But there are a few things about the business of software that you have to understand if you want to pass judgement on the quality. A development cycle begins with a laundry list of features that you want to implement. In the case of game development, a certain amount of prototyping and gameplay design goes into the game before it's ever given the green light to begin alpha level development and is assigned a production timeline. But that aside, you have your list and you begin implementing these features in an incremental fashion. Development teams take their direction from project leads who take their leads from other management, etc. At some point, a Product manager is giving the overall direction from a marketing and product perspective. But day to day, developers are doing things based on PRIORITY and SCHEDULE. They have iterative milestones to hit that represent key testable units of functionality that they can then deliver to QA and test.

What this means to you as a consumer is this. When a final deadline is given, developers implement what they can that's left on their to do list as quickly as possible. It's obvious to me as a developer that the server browser was either handled at the last minute with little forethought or it was given to a junior developer or it was outsourced to some other company. Any of the above could be the case. And there are plenty of other examples of this that I could mention. But go back and read the posts when we were all waiting on the game to come out. Most of us were about to die of anticipation. Would have really wanted to wait another 6 months if they were given the time?

So, speaking as an experienced, seasoned software engineer who's been around a while, who's written gaming code and who works in software delivering shrink-wrapped products, I'm ok with the overall quality and design of this game. There are things I would change, sure. There are bugs that need immediate attention. Yep. That's not my beef. That's going to happen. Your mileage may vary. This is just my opinion.

That said, here's what I'm not very impressed with. I'm not impressed with EA's community management. There is not good communication coming out of EA about what's being addressed and what isn't. Also, I think some of the most severe bugs (the red name thing for instance) need to be patched sooner rather than later. The game has been out ... two months or more now. It's time for another release. In fact, if I were them, I'd patch monthly. Then we could just get used to the schedule and check the patch notes.

Anyways, sorry for the long post. I'm ok with people being critical. But a little background information might help.

[WarGimp]

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

The Tribes series never enjoyed even half of the fanbase that the Battlefield games have accrued.

Sadly, I was one of the people who loved Tribes 2, too.

True, however Dice doesn't have nearly the name that Dynamix did before it was wiped out.

All in all, what I'm saying is that you really should know something about what's going on before you make comments on it.

Yeah right!
Like that's gonna happen any time soon!
:p

BTW, notice how the first expantion pack is slated to come out... what, 3 months after release of the game? This means that Dice has had very little time to be working on anything else. I'm suprised that we got any patches since they would normally be in a code freeze right now.

[vbl]

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

BTW, notice how the first expantion pack is slated to come out... what, 3 months after release of the game? This means that Dice has had very little time to be working on anything else. I'm suprised that we got any patches since they would normally be in a code freeze right now.

Actually the expansion is being developed by DICE Canada, which is a separate development shop from the group that did BF2. (Speaking of knowing something about an issue before talking about it... :))

True, however Dice doesn't have nearly the name that Dynamix did before it was wiped out.

All in all, what I'm saying is that you really should know something about what's going on before you make comments on it.

Yeah right!
Like that's gonna happen any time soon!
:p

I know plenty about what we're discussing - I just interpret the landscape differently than you.

Nevertheless, EA won't release DICE based on BF-related happenings. If they do it'll be something that was planned long before BF2 was ever released, and it'll be economic and/or political on a much larger scale than anything we're discussing. Dynamix's demise was probably planned by management long before anyone at Dynamix knew, and probably had a lot less to do with the actual game than anyone might suspect.

[WarGimp]

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

I didn't mean you, Var. I ment in general. Your posts are some of the more enlightened around here... well, sometimes! :p

I also didn't say that Dice would be done away with over BF2. Despite community complaints, they've done a remarkable job. I was mearly underlining the real situation. Dice can't bitch at EA. If they had missed deadlines, they would have been in serious trouble.

That's all I'm saying. Too many folks just don't understand what's going on, but *think* they know it all.

[SpeedyGonzales]

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

I can't beleive there are still people around on these boards that still don't understand that the memory leak was SERVER SIDE. Unless your running a server you weren't having memory leak problems.......

ok,

well, my machine crashed at least 50-60 times for some reason..
and I have never had this problem with ANY other game.. and I have
a hundred of the latest sitting on my shelves..played them all..

EA released an unfinished product.. no question about it.

And for anyone who says 3 months is 'normal' or 'appropriate' is clueless.
Hell, the entire staff at DICE went on vacation the week of release..
how clueless can a company be ??


I assure you, 3 months is NOT normal.. When EPIC releases a new title,
EVEN WITH A NEW GAME ENGINE , they are ready to pounce at any
bugs, exploits, etc, and have a patch out the end of the 1st week..
EA releases a patch at week 1 that fixes 2 things and leaves the other
150+ for 3 months later..

EA is a disgrace to the PC gaming industry. DICE are just bad programmers.

[The Question]

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

I love you Speedy. EA should be knocked down to the status of abysmal.

My love for EA has died with my dreams of getting Jlo a little of the woohoo.

[SpeedyGonzales]

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?
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!

who cares what it offers..

if people buy it, and it doesnt work, then all that stuff you mentioned is
moot...

try to actually have a point of argument, rather than your own hogwash
next time.. what a laugh..

[Jesse]

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

EA isn't going to fire anyone - they own more than 50% of the DICE (someone on these boards mentioned as much as 65% ownership).

EA also completed a tender offer for shares of Stockholm-based developer Digital Illusions and now owns
approximately 68 percent -- a controlling interest in the company. EA continues its successful long-term
publishing relationship with Digital Illusions, and in June 2005, we released one of the year's most anticipated
PC-games -- Battlefield 2TM.
EA also purchased 19.9 percent of Ubisoft.

Taken from the EA 2005 Annual Report, which can be found here, just to show ya I ain't making up facts

http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_files/IROL/88/88189/reports/2005_AR.pdf

[SpeedyGonzales]

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

I'm going to chime in on the Wargimp side of this fence. When I was in school studying Computer Science, our school started a gaming curriculum. Several of my friends and I took that experience and tried to write a simple game. We poured hours upon hours into this little project. And while it was great fun and tremendously rewarding, reality has a way of bringing you back down to earth. All we have to show for it is some cool APIs and some prototype code.

Writing a game is hard, even if you are using the api's that are available today (which we didn't have, we wrote the networking stuff ourselves in C and the video stuff in Assembly.) Developers consistently underestimate what it's going to take to get something done. And this thread is a perfect example. Don't assume something is easy until you've done it yourself.

A few other points. When you say "this code sucks" or "it shouldn't have to use 1 Gig of RAM" or "Game X doesn't use that much RAM", you aren't actually doing any real analysis. If I'm designing a game like this where FPS is crucial and you want high graphic detail, you are going to want to cache as much of that stuff in memory as you possibly can. From a FPS standpoint, it's the best option. The original poster is correct that you can provide Just In Time algorithms to do this without using as much memory. And I am by no means trying to convince you people that the code is good (because I haven't seen it and I haven't analyzed the design in detail.) But you might want to see some numbers before making such a judgement. BF2 may have many more textures to store per level / map than the FPS in question. Until you know the details, it's really pointless to guess.

But there are a few things about the business of software that you have to understand if you want to pass judgement on the quality. A development cycle begins with a laundry list of features that you want to implement. In the case of game development, a certain amount of prototyping and gameplay design goes into the game before it's ever given the green light to begin alpha level development and is assigned a production timeline. But that aside, you have your list and you begin implementing these features in an incremental fashion. Development teams take their direction from project leads who take their leads from other management, etc. At some point, a Product manager is giving the overall direction from a marketing and product perspective. But day to day, developers are doing things based on PRIORITY and SCHEDULE. They have iterative milestones to hit that represent key testable units of functionality that they can then deliver to QA and test.

What this means to you as a consumer is this. When a final deadline is given, developers implement what they can that's left on their to do list as quickly as possible. It's obvious to me as a developer that the server browser was either handled at the last minute with little forethought or it was given to a junior developer or it was outsourced to some other company. Any of the above could be the case. And there are plenty of other examples of this that I could mention. But go back and read the posts when we were all waiting on the game to come out. Most of us were about to die of anticipation. Would have really wanted to wait another 6 months if they were given the time?

So, speaking as an experienced, seasoned software engineer who's been around a while, who's written gaming code and who works in software delivering shrink-wrapped products, I'm ok with the overall quality and design of this game. There are things I would change, sure. There are bugs that need immediate attention. Yep. That's not my beef. That's going to happen. Your mileage may vary. This is just my opinion.

That said, here's what I'm not very impressed with. I'm not impressed with EA's community management. There is not good communication coming out of EA about what's being addressed and what isn't. Also, I think some of the most severe bugs (the red name thing for instance) need to be patched sooner rather than later. The game has been out ... two months or more now. It's time for another release. In fact, if I were them, I'd patch monthly. Then we could just get used to the schedule and check the patch notes.

Anyways, sorry for the long post. I'm ok with people being critical. But a little background information might help.

who gives a flying turd how hard it is to write a game ?

Ya know what, its hard to build a car too.. but if the damn thing
breaks down right after I drive it off the lot, Im gonna be ticked off.

Yes, it would look bad if they released a patch every other day to
fix all these problems, but so what, at least theyd be trying..

Not only does EA get a F for final product, but they also get a F
for effort as well, F for support, and a big ole middle finger F for
acting like its no big deal..

A lot of people here would say that if the game works properly
on 95% of peoples pc's that would be a great title.. ANNNKKK !!
WRONG! But thats EAs way of thinking, AND a lot of game publishers
as well..

boy, some peoples rationale' is down right disturbing..Hell, no wonder
EA releases unfinished games, its GOOD BUSINESS, I suppose!

[mrbucket]

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

Speedy, you gonna file?

[SpeedyGonzales]

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

Speedy, you gonna file?

nah, sorry.. This game is about to run its course with me anyhow..

ya know its kinda sad... that defending my position about how crappy
BF2 is in this and other forums is actually funner than playing the half
finished game.. :)


I got to admit, I was unfamiliar with EAs games.. well, except for Madden
on a console.. but I was unfamiliar with how EA treated their PC titles..
This whole thing has been a learning experience.. and what I learned
is that EA is total junk.. and control freaks as well, which is kinda funny,
they controlling the junk..

Good Luck though..

[strathound]

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

Not only does EA get a F for final product, but they also get a F
for effort as well, F for support, and a big ole middle finger F for
acting like its no big deal..

A lot of people here would say that if the game works properly
on 95% of peoples pc's that would be a great title.. ANNNKKK !!
WRONG! But thats EAs way of thinking, AND a lot of game publishers
as well..

Hey Speedy. Man I'm not trying to tell you that you are wrong for being critical of the game. Again, if you read what I said, my point is that given the way software is built these days (and the complexity), you are going to have bugs at release. You are right, you and I judge a title on a different scale. Same with me and Variable. My only expectation is that the problems get fixed quickly. But quickly to me means within 3 to 6 months. If we don't see some progress soon, I'll be right there with ya. Honestly. But the problem is that PC games are not making as much money for these game makers as console games. These guys aren't writing these games for the greater social good. They are writing them to make money. So they aren't going to spend a lot of time writing code if it doesn't mean that they will make back some of that investment.

This is why I stress with everyone, if you want to send a message to EA, make it MATURE (if that's even possible around here), make it intelligent and KEEP IT SIMPLE. You aren't going to get cooperative play, unless it's in an expansion. They won't be adding any new features, just bug fixes as patches. You aren't going to get 18 new sniper rifles. Sorry. But if you focus on the must haves versus your wish list items and put forth a united front, you might actually get some of the key game play issues resolved that are impacting the game.

But that will never happen around here because few of you actually have the emotional maturity to put your own issues aside and think about what's really important. Just calling them like I see em. Sorry.

As an aside, I've played this game on servers with **64** PEOPLE with little or no lag. Sometimes it's laggier than other times. But when you consider the networking hurdles to make that happen .... whoa. That's an impressive feat. Sure the browser sucks. But at least we have 32 vs. 32 servers running pretty smoothly. That red tag bug needs to be fixed though.

[-=SiN=-Broown]

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

I pray that EA stays away from ubisoft. If they ruin another game series I am switching to a console.