Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

[megawhompertoo]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I play SF mostly because of the many different vehicles. Playing a 64 size map with 24 people, there are vehicles lying around EVERYWHERE. The vehicles are faster, too--you can get anywhere on any map in 15-20s on an ATV. ATV's are the ultimate answer for regaining lost CP's.

I get a kick out of some of the weapons, and genuinely enjoy not getting bombs dropped on my head every time I move.

Why did they include arty in SF? Arty sucks and is inappropriate given the circumstances. I guess it gives the commander something to play with, but it doesn't feel right.

[JonnyMacFred102]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I pretty much only play sf.

I think if ppl are having problems with lag/their system, then of course they will hate it.
If you can run it good (like me) then its literally the bomb.

But what you don't get is SF is NOT laggier than bf2 because of our computers. SF IS laggier than bf2 because of the bad coding done by Dice. The maps are not optimized for smoothness and the game is not nearly as stable because it was slapped together in a rush.

If you can run SF good, than your bf2 will run even better.

Most people just don't like the night maps (which are very boring and laggy) and the overall experience. Most people here probably only got it to unlock all the cool weapons in vanilla bf2.

[Jeff_Lebowski]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I love SF more now because of Warlord and Ghost Town. Especially Ghost Town. That's my favorite I think. It combines land and water in a cool way, as well as some verticality because of the high buildings, all packed into a cool urban setting. Every kind of weapon can be useful as well as the vehicles and choppers. ANd there's places to hide from choppers and an AA vehicle to blast them.

I like China Wall, 32 player version the best out of all the Euro Forces maps because you can battle up along with the wall infantry vs. infantry, and you're basically impervious to vehicles up there. Sweet.

I think SF isn't played as much simply because many players can play the vanilla maps forever it seems without getting tired of them. People eventually want to be able to own with choppers and jets and they can get that with vanilla BF2.

Overall, SF is cool if you like to run and gun as an infantry man a lot, whereas some BF2 maps almost require the use of vehicles. Sometimes I just don't want to deal with vehicles, although I did play some off all versions today, and had fun on Dragon Valley because of the big, openess of it and the vehicles.

[imported_Underpant]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I only played it for 3 or 4 days, it just wasn't fun for me. I forced myself to play, then I went back to Karkand, Sharqi, and all of the great original maps.

[=DNC=SYSEX73]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I wont buy SF or EURO. I wont ever pay for an update, no matter what its called.

Big Guys, make a MOD friendly engine. Give us some real support, behind the scenes. Not just to the MODs you like, or have EA people working on. Not that this is happening with BF2 and any big MOD groups, errr, cough cough.

The big guys just want money, and with a very trong MOD community around it, there games will have a longer retail life. Therefore, it helps there bottom line.

How long would BF1942 lasted without DCOM and the good ones?

[HYP3R]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

Not sure about you guys, but I routinely play on maybe 2-3 SF servers. And I am just happy with that. They run my favorite maps, my FPS is good and for the most part about 99% of the time I don't get the twits in the server that like to TK or abusive admins. So not sure why everyone is complaining about 350 servers vs. 1600 or whatever it is. Maybe some of you are constantly getting banned or kicked from several servers and you need more choices?

[urban//mercenary]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

One trend i notice is that since Euroforce came out, some SF servers have switched to Euroforce servers.

I think this is because you can get more participants since the server can play both BF2 and Euro maps. While SF maps can only be played on SF servers.

What i dont like about EA is the fact that they isolated SF. You cant mix SF and BF2 maps without restarting the applications each time. While BF2 and Euroforce maps can be played back to back without application restarts.

I wonder why they did this?

sorry this post is a bit late.. but I think it has to do with the rappel and zip lines. I believe they have to program both the surface to be repelled and the animated "what you see when you trigger the rappel". If this is true, that means all the buildings walls and other objects are programmed differently to support the rappel than in BF2.

[kran1um]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

Warlord is by far the best map. It can be Karkanish in a way, but you don't have the choppers around. Mass Destruction is alway fun also.

[Curtis12]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

well i only got 512MB RAM so go figure why i prefer regular BF2

[Evil_Eye]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

Fairly obvious answer -- It cost £20, you cant play SF maps in rotation with Vanilla maps, Some ppl are huge armour fans, Some ppl dont like night maps, Its buggy and laggy, you have to reboot BF2 to switch between SF and Vanilla modes & You cant use new unlocks, which some find annoying.

sorry this post is a bit late.. but I think it has to do with the rappel and zip lines. I believe they have to program both the surface to be repelled and the animated "what you see when you trigger the rappel". If this is true, that means all the buildings walls and other objects are programmed differently to support the rappel than in BF2.

That is probably why, but they should have made Vanilla maps grapple compatible and then just disabled them. This way, yuo wouldnt have to reboot.

[SR16M5]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

SF only since it came out. Better maps (day) than vanilla except Iron Gator (blows). No performance issues , Always can find Large Battles with Low Ping. I am getting Euro when I can set aside a full day of gaming.

[imported_Apostle]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

Positives -

* Smaller maps! Depends on preferences I suppose, but it doesn't take long to get into the action.
* Improved graphics and 'fuller' maps, with more buildings and other content.
* Enough content to fill a game in it's own right.
* Grapple and zip add a whole new dimension to gameplay.
* No bloody jets!
* Some really cool maps that standout above all BF2 maps (IMO). Warlord, Surge, Ghost Town.

Negative -

* No integration into BF2 map rotations. People have to pick to play Special Forces, whereas you can now join a normal server to play both BF2 and EF without need to disconect, load the mod ect.
* Night maps aren't to my taste.
* Helicopter lag.
* Some clans which have two servers, used to have one playing vanilla and one playing SF. Now with the release of EF, they're switching the SF server to the three EF maps. This might be temporary, but SF is the only loser in this situation.

[Eternal-Souljah]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I have it but have only played like 4 - 5 hours of it in total, and I have had it since it came out.

^I'll do what this dude done:

Positives:

.Some night maps are good, especially Devils pearch, as I Snipe alot, it provides a good setting and stealth.

.Grappling hooks, Zip lines etc are good.

.ATV's, pickup trucks and other vehicles are good.

Negatives:

.Hard to find a server thats giving me a good ping, I try find 32/64 player servers, but usually come up with American servers, so my ping is bad.

.In SF it feels harder to get kills in big maps, so less points to be made if there are less players.

[ShadowWarrior18D]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

I'm always on SF,offers more infantry based combat which I want so SF all the way.Got sick of Karkand,etc.

[almanac]

Re: Why Is Sf Less Played Then Bf2

The vanilla of any game will always get played more. People don't want to spend the money.