To the "Moral" Player

[Nihilist]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

This debate is largely irrelevant anyway. The latest patch will now force everyone to play a certain way, and put an end to bouncing around like a total retard.

[TAW_Ender]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

QUOTE: "These comments, IMO, directly contradict each other. If the current state of the game is to be able to warp or to exploit it in anyway (which would be fully within the game engine), such as being able to get into buildings that you should not be able to get into, then, according to the latter quote, you should have no problem with it until EA addresses."

I don't think I'm contradicting myself, I think I'm making a subtle argument that may escape most people

Obviously, "warping" and "dolphin-diving" are two vastly different exploits. I can imagine no league in which the first wouldn't be prohibited, and no league in which the second wouldn't be allowed.

An exploit such as "warping" would eradicate any vestige of fun or tactical play, "dolphin-diving" does not do this. It arguably makes infantry vs. infantry combat more "twitch" oriented, but certainly less "tactical".

The situation you presented is drawn from an extreme circumstance, you know full well there's no way to reconcile it without making a concession.

QUOTE: "I disagree with that especially considering the fact that BF has been so buggy and, IMO, there were much more pressing issues (and still are) than this to deal with. They rushed the game out, what would make you think that they wouldn't rush the patches out as well?

On top of that, they may have seen the exploit but couldn't come up with a way to properly deal with it without affecting something else that they did not want to change."

This fix couldn't possibly take more than adjusting a small bit of code. That they were "rushed" is not a valid argument.


To answer your questions:

-I assert the next patch is based on community opinion because of the community update on EA's offical site.

-Of course the clan matches I've played in league have no rules. Why would they?

-Because dolphin-diving exists in the current game, it is a viable tacitc. Should I reduce the hitpoints of my plane before taking off because EA/DICE feels it has too many? Of course not.

[WarGimp]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

This is definately the most interesting and entertaining thread i have ever read on these forums.
Constructive critisism from both sides of the fence "so to speak"
And no Flame wars!

This is how it should be lads! Thanks for making my day.

WTF?
Are you some kind of retard or something?
This thread is nothing more than spam puked out by so dweeb who thinks he know something about something just because he's got opinions 'n stuff!
:p

Just kiddin! Relax! PUT DOWN THE AXE!

Seriously tho, I don't see how you can not be critical of explotive play styles and still present useful information to the community that can help evolve the game.
It would reduce development to a game of blindman's bluff...
Wait a sec. That seems to be the way Dice does their dev work.

[vbl]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

I'd tend to believe it's a loophole that DICE was aware of, but grossly underestimated it's potential effectiveness.

First correct thing you've said.

You've identified what we call "the means". But "the means" is nothing without "actors" to employ them, and thus enters every bunny hopper, prone jumper and dolphin diver.

It's not any one person's fault. It's really a shared problem, in the sense that once a few people started doing it regularly, other people started doing it to compete, and it snowballed from a simple, infrequently accessed loophole into a mode of gameplay - a mode that so easily supercedes other modes that it creates much frustration.

You said that you can't be blamed for choosing not to handicap yourself, and that's true - but we can blame you for being one more person on the list of people taking advantage of the loophole; a choice which, mathematically speaking, just causes it to multiply all the faster.

I don't bunny hop or prone jump not because I can't, but because I refuse to contribute to the BF2 (or gaming) culture of doing whatever it takes to win, even at the expense of the game's immersion and its inevitable reduction down to 2-3 tactics that everyone must do in order to be successful.

It's DICE's fault, no doubt, but people like you aren't helping and we're all quite justified in calling you on it.

[imported_The 13th Raptor]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

I wonder how much testing Dice has done on this game.. Its impossible for dice to test the limits of the game as much as thousands and thousands of players over the span of many hours, i dont think its unfeasable for Dice to overlook the fact that people would do these "lame" things with such frequency and that so many people would concider it a problem.

I did not see any point blank GL'ing and Prone jumping in the promotional vids, what i did see was tactical combat, i suppose i feel sort of cheated by EA and Dice.

[Tactical_Marksman]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

So it's forbidden to judge the way others play, but you want the mods to judge and forbid certain opinions about play from the boards? That doesn't make sense to me.

I support the right of server Admins to set rules for their own servers, for these forum Admins to set rules for their own forums, and for people who don't like either set of rules to avoid those servers/threads which offend them.

[Q-Tex]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

This is definately the most interesting and entertaining thread i have ever read on these forums.
Constructive critisism from both sides of the fence "so to speak"
And no Flame wars!

This is how it should be lads! Thanks for making my day.

[imported_holysoldier05]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

This is definately the most interesting and entertaining thread i have ever read on these forums.
Constructive critisism from both sides of the fence "so to speak"
And no Flame wars!


This is how it should be lads! Thanks for making my day.

Agree! 100% Its funny how politics fit into a game! haha

[imported_The 13th Raptor]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

It seems the forum cant keep up with the amount of posts being made :p

[Warbird_7]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Let me outline a premise, which I have thought long and hard about: As a player, you have absolutely no right to criticize another a person's style of play. You have every right to criticize a flawed game, but not how someone chooses to play it.

Um...now I'm not an expert on these kinds of matters, but it seems to me that if someone is engaging in an act that is unfair, then the community to which that person belongs has a right to criticize that person's actions; but not the person himself. I think, but again I am not an expert, this is closer to what you (TAW_Ender) were trying to say. This is especially true in an online community, where very few players know each other on a personal level.

If you choose to abstain from bunny-hoping, or any other tactic that's labeled "unrealistic", within a game engine that was never intended for "realism", then BRAVO!

Indeed, those who wish for realism might find a better experience elsewhere. However, there could be an alternative reason for the aforementioned abstinence; a moral reason. To better explain this, I refer to a post I made some days ago:

Okay, I've read all of this guy's posts in this thread; and I want to tell the rest of you to stop flaming him [this was in reference to another poster on the thread who held a somewhat similar view as you (TAW_Ender)]! Squad leaders are given the ability to call in resupplies, they are given points for the position they created, and all of this is accomplished IN THE GAME. And while we're at it, let's stop whining about plane whores, chopper whores, armor whores, n00b-tubers, bunny hoppers, dolphin divers, and stat whores. The game gives them the ability to do the things they do, so why shouldn't they be able to do it?!
...
...
...because its abusive to the system. You CAN do "X", "Y", and "Z"; but that does not make "X", "Y", and "Z" right, fair, or even justifiable. BF2 is a game, and, like all games, there is something we like to call "good sportsmanship". Just because you CAN do something does not mean that you SHOULD do that something. While there may be no detectable consequences from your point of view, you lose the respect of the community.

I won't flame you as a person, I don't know you personally and thus don't have the right to do so. I WILL, however, flame your actions; they are selfish, abusive, and unsportsmanlike.

I admit, my stats are nowhere near yours in comparison. You probably have 10 or 12 times my kills, have a k:d ratio much better than mine, and one heckuva lot more medals than I do; but there is one thing, just as real as you stats, that you don't have: that's the respect of the community.

Play how you will, but keep in mind that your actions will be remembered and will reflect on you as a person.

Hmm...upon reflection, that was worded unnecessarily harsh; but, regardless, I stand by my point.

But please, keep your self-righteous indignation to yourself.

If this refers to the "self-righteous indignation" that extends itself to personal attacks on others, then I quite agree with this statement. However, if it is reference to comments against this kind of behavior (bunny hopping, dolphin diving, etc), then I respectfully request that you read the following:

...I ask you show the same respect that I've tried to.

While you are no doubt aware of this, I respond for the benefit of those reading this post; demanding that opinions opposing the practices of bunny hopping, dolphin diving, etc cease and desist is contradicts your above statement.

There are three types of players within this community:

1. The first plays the game as is. They may complain about a certain tactic, or a certain imbalance, but largely this sort of player could care less. This is perhaps the category into which the greatest number of players falls.

I do not have the information required to agree or disagree with this statement. I am not aware of where the opinion of the majority lies.

2. The second chooses to criticize the game for its lack of realism, not only making the questionable assumption that Battlefield was intended to be realistic, but also assuming that reality is a viable premise from which to base game design!

Battlefield 2 is not, nor ever was intended to be, a "realistic" simulation. On a slightly off-topic note, I believe that reality is a completely acceptable idea upon which to base a game; but, I digress.

A minority of these players goes on to criticize others for using tactics such as "dolphin-diving" - as if the PLAYER is to blame the the DEVELOPER'S inclusion of what EA themselves labels a "feature"!

I refer to my above quote from a previous (but related) discussion.

Ironically, what these gamers fail to realize is that with every negative post and negative comment they do nothing but breed contempt where it should not exist.

A very sad situation indeed; when that said post attacks players.

Their frustration is caused no one but themselves, and they are ultimately just as detrimental to the community as the players they criticize.

An object in motion will stay in motion until acted upon by another force. In a similar manner, people (generally speaking) won't complain about a problem if there isn't one. Since there are such complaints, it is a reasonable assumption that there is a problem; hence, the blame for "Their frustration" cannot be put entirely on themselves.

3. But there are a third sort of player, those such as myself, who approach the game with an amoral eye. The competition player does not handicap himself, because he knows his opponent will show him no such courtesy. These players work to gain a competitive edge within the game, and are willing to use any tactic to achieve it.

Hmm. "...because he knows that his opponent will show him no such courtesy." In a game, one should always expect that participants will behave in an acceptable manner, while acknowledging the reality that there will be those who don't. "These players work to gain a competitive edge within the game, and are willing to use any tactic to achieve it." The end does not always justify the means. Yes, it is nice to win, but at what cost to others?

I challenge you to find one logical basis on which to tell ME how to play the game.

(No, "realism" and your personal enjoyment don't count.)

If I was the only one, then yes. I have no right to tell you how to play in order to suit my own personal tastes. However, if I am not the only one, if, in fact, I am the majority; then yes. The will of the majority has the authority to tell you how to play. Again, this is all based on if the majority holds my views; I am not currently aware of this statistic.

1. Weak, inaccurate weapons make the grenade launcher, rocket launcher, and C4 Frisbee often better at eliminating infantry than a standard rifle. (I have a 2:1 KDR with the Assault Rifle, which is likely more than 80% of players on this board. Don't bother me telling me I have poor aim.)

Woah. It's a heckuva lot better than mine!

As you see, the flaws within the game necessitate dolphin-diving. Players do not use it to "grief" you, they use it because it is the most effective tactic available to them within the game engine. If rifles were more effective, or the hit-detection simply less spotty, resorting to other tactics wouldn’t be as essential.

Is it really necessary? What makes it this way? If they have the option to use this kind of tactic, then they also have the option to not use this kind of tactic. Again, I refer to my above post on a different thread.

I for one am looking forward to the patch, as I too would like to see a slower, more tactically oriented game. I hate infantry combat in its current state, as I find the most satisfying kills come from the use of my rifle’s iron-sights. But as long as my opponent is able to use these tactics, it would be moronic to handicap myself.

Again, it seems to be your opinion that tactics such as bunny hopping or dolphin diving are necessary; to the point where not using such tactics is considered a handicap because your opponent “is able to use these tactics”. People are able to use many things, cheats, hacks, exploits, etc; this fact does not condone the usage of the aforementioned tactics.

More importantly, no player has any right to tell me, or anyone else, what tactics I'm allowed to use.

I would argue that the majority of players (as a whole) has this right; but, of course, whether you listen to that or not is still your own decision.

And, yes, the top clans WILL still be TOP once the game is patched. They're the best not because they bunny-hop, but because they're willing to explore the game without the pretension of the "purists".

I can’t argue that people who use these tactics have impressive stats, making them “good” by that standard. The tactics are effective, of this there is no doubt; but does that make it right to use them?

I would then propose to the moderators of this forum that threads, which attack players for using legitimate tactics within the game engine, be instantly locked.

Now this strikes me as a little extreme. Even if the thread is attacking players (of which I disapprove), there is still the opportunity for the thread to be discussed in a reasonable manner; maybe even resolve to an opposite conclusion from when it started.

Proper threads should focus on the flaw within the game, with suggestions as to how to fix them.

If all the flaws were in the game, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. Players can also be a legitimate “flaw”, as the existence of this thread proves; and thus merit suggested solutions.


I hope I have been able to add something of value to this discussion.

[WarGimp]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

I hope I have been able to add something of value to this discussion.

Hellya.
In fact, that post was so well worded I don't feel I need to add anything, other than to say "hellya".
Er... again.
Hellya.

[imported_Fig]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

It is interesting to see some normal BF2 players come to the conclusion that I did a while ago, that in many aspects, the core gameplay of BF2 is flawed.

I agree that dolphin diving and bunny hopping are nearly forced on the player, as not using them results in an unforced disadvantage, so it is to everyone's advantage to become good at this retarded techniques. The only thing one can really argue is if the game is better when rifles are more effective at killing people or when flying c4 dolphins are.

That is a question of personal preference, no matter what you say.

[HowieMandel]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Original poster is just another reason why the game suck sometimes.

He thinks, his antics dont ruin the fun of the MAJORITY.
Joke.

lamer

[noobeffect]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

One of the best posts ever.

Telling a person that his/her style of play is unfair just because he or she is dolphin diving or bunny hopping IS EXACTLY like saying a person in a tank is not playing fair when fragging regular infrantry. Learn how to play the game and quit whining about people who actually want to win.

[imported_The 13th Raptor]

Re: To the "Moral" Player

Well, this should put an end to some of the arguing...

[DICE] Xavos: not allowing players to jump and shoot is forcing infantry to use the 3 stances in the way they were originally designed to be used. Players that go prone have the biggest advantage, and now have an advantage over bunny hoppers too. That is the way we feel BF should play. I personally enjoy the dichotomy between BF and Quake in this regard