Battlefield 1943 Q&A with Gustav Halling

[David Champion]

Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&A with Gustav Halling

There's a difference between "fanatic" and "sheep"

I am a BF fanatic. I have screenshots of BF2 on the wall in my living room and screenshots of DC on the wall in my master bedroom. This is called selling out.

I just don't understand how anyone can play BF1942 and then actually support where DICE is going. Tell me: were you a "fanatic" back in '02?

And this is just in case anyone forgot what the BF series is all about:

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyG56llMYuE[/media]

epic arcade/strategy gameplay.

Not just an arcade game that is too much of arcade.

Again, "fanatic", you just described it... you don't have to play it ya' know because if you "just" play it , then that'd be a "sheep". I am very clear on the difference my man.

The games not out yet and they are already heading to the electric chair?
People are not even giving them a chance. Its quite funny is all I am saying.

:salute: RANT ON My friends!

[[MyIS]Dan]

Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&A with Gustav Halling

Alex is right for the server side stuff, for example Crysis will use 50% of a dual core CPU and will use around 10% when empty, ArmA is even worse for this using around a whole core to 50% of a CPU on a Dual Quad server, but then ArmA runs like a pig at the bets of times.

I'm pretty sure Dice / EA will optimize the server code tho. :)

[McSteviee]

Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&A with Gustav Halling

Lots of posts here on 'we don't want this console ported, dumbed down crap, we want BF3' which I pretty much agree with. The alternative, however, is watching two BF franchise games released for consoles only and still having to wait for BF3 (or whatever it will be). I guarantee that if DICE were not going to release 1943 or BC2 for the PC, there would be people saying 'at least give us a taste of Frostbite on the PC while we wait for BF3'.

[David Champion]

Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&A with Gustav Halling

I don't think client computers are the problem when trying to run high intensity game platforms such as Frostbite, more the dedicated servers that have to run the games.

Servers will often run multiple instances of a game, maybe 5 servers per box. Making a highly intensive game may mean the servers could only handle 1-2 instances. This is turn would either force ISP's to buy more servers (which often have a payback period of months).

When revenue is so scarce, buying equipment with such a long payback period can be daunting. You must also consider the overhead costs and externalities associated with buying new hardware. You have to store it, keep it cooled, perhaps even employee more staff?

Therefore, specifications that may suit a PC might not be feasible for GSP's. I'm not saying this is the case, i'm just pointing out that there are other issues surrounding bringing out new games.

Excellent point as always Alex. I just hate that no one is giving this game a chance at the moment.

[Death Merchant]

Re: Battlefield 1943 Q&A with Gustav Halling

There's a difference between "fanatic" and "sheep"

I am a BF fanatic. I have screenshots of BF2 on the wall in my living room and screenshots of DC on the wall in my master bedroom. This is called selling out.

I just don't understand how anyone can play BF1942 and then actually support where DICE is going. Tell me: were you a "fanatic" back in '02

Most people on here havent even played battlefield 1942, 24 players is a disgrace DICE have forgotten what BF is about

I still play bf1942 on occasion and last time i checked there was 1200 players on the game and around 5000 on BF2 so theres a market for 64 player games with large maps but theyve sold out to consoles and there crappy 24 player limit, i think EA is pulling the strings here it seems there policy since 06 is too make as much money with as little time in development as possible, 24 players is simply means that they can release the game quicker, having pc support on the side just means a greater market for the game

as consoles were he money is in gaming today, take away the 360 and the ps3 and you lose most of the market we can complain about it all we like but its a simple fact it just annoys me that they wont create 64 player maps for the pc and by doing so theyve lost most of the market that still plays BF 1942/BFV/BF2/BF2142

I don't think client computers are the problem when trying to run high intensity game platforms such as Frostbite, more the dedicated servers that have to run the games.

Servers will often run multiple instances of a game, maybe 5 servers per box. Making a highly intensive game may mean the servers could only handle 1-2 instances. This is turn would either force ISP's to buy more servers (which often have a payback period of months).

When revenue is so scarce, buying equipment with such a long payback period can be daunting. You must also consider the overhead costs and externalities associated with buying new hardware. You have to store it, keep it cooled, perhaps even employee more staff?

Therefore, specifications that may suit a PC might not be feasible for GSP's. I'm not saying this is the case, i'm just pointing out that there are other issues surrounding bringing out new games.

You cant honestly believe that, it wasnt a problem in 2002 why is it suddenly a problem now?

64 player servers dont run on VPS's they run on dedicated servers which there are tens of millions of worldwide, 128 player servers even werent a problem in 2004 when servers ran on single or dual cpu's now you can get 8 cores in a server for the same price so its a non-issue as far as im concerned