Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

[troybob]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

The real reason behind the smaller player number is that there is a so much more data for servers and bandwidth to deal with, because there are so many destroyable objects. So more players= more lag. I dont belive that EA would just want torture us with smaller player numbers. Its just a compromise between quality and performance. They aren't just capable to optimize it so much, to make it playable.

well I'd like to see some data regarding how much bandwidth utilization this destructable environment takes. I doubt it's anything beyond a dedicated server. In the Xbox scneario (no dedicated servers) - it may be a little hard because the servers are usually at broadband (not data center) speeds.

I'd like to see the differences in the data for clients and servers respectively to see where the burden of the new features lie. I couldn't imagine that the destructible environments would tax network bandwidth that much as I can think of similar events that would be close to what they would be. The best way to test this is to get a BF2 map with a bunch of bridges and blow them all at the same time to see if it lags.

I would think that the network would be taxed greater before everything is blown up because it would have to calculate the collisions as you got close. Once all was flattened - the collisions get less complicated.

This was experienced in the carrier lag in Desert Combat. As a player approached, it began to do calculations regarding how the two objects would interact should they collide. The problem was that when you got too close to the carrier it would calculate for the entire carrier even though you weren't close to the front. They split it into 3 separate collision meshes and voila - better network performance.

If you think about it - destructible environments should only tax network for a second or two until the dust settles - and it wouldn't be much more than blowing a bridge in bf2 - would it?

I'm no programmer - but I'm still not convinced that the new features would be the cause of 24 player servers. I could be wrong though - but it seems as though there could be ways around that.

And if it comes down to it - i'd rather have 64 players than destructible environments. Gameplay > graphics.

if this was the limitation - let us turn it off for low bandwidth servers (or xbox users that want more than 24 players)

[Rambo]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

Karkand was popular for several reasons but one of the main ones was the ability to get a lot of points really fast. This is BF2's "grinder" map. You grind out points because lets face it, the map is a meat grinder. Now that does not mean the map is not fun or it does not have good choke points because it is a good map that was well thought out. It just means for those maps where players want to see a lot of action and get high scores, this is your map.

In 1942 the most popular map was not Berlin. It was maps like El Al! Points really only mattered realitive to the others on the server. So if the top player walked away with 30 points, that was just good enough for them. But on BF2 where you have all the unlocks, rankings, etc points DO matter.

When maps that are the core of the BF world are not doing well then that should be a huge red flag that something is wrong. Personally I believe the issue is with a lot of the design decisions in BF2 gameplay, the way rankings/stats was implemented, and in some cases poor map design. All that together is was a good map like Karkand became "THE MAP" of BF2.\

On the commander issues, I love the concept, absolutly HATE how they implemented the commander. UVA, Scan, and Arty were 3 of the so called features which really took away from the game. Instead of doing things to support your own team, the commander was more geared to screwing over the other team NO MATTER HOW SMART they played. In an online game it should always require skill on both parties to do anything. Even at least a little skill or risk. But the commanders stuff requires no skill to use and the defender can not use any skill to evade and pretty much discourages anyone from defending.

yes these are the things i didnt like in bf2

Also it is console code friendly and not designed for PC as they already said,
IT WONT REPLACE YOUR BF2Frostbite sucks

How are you guys playing BF1943? I'd like to play as well so I too can make judgments about the gameplay and player count! Oh wait, you haven't so how about you all STFU! Oh right, you're the b***h squad sponsored by TotalGamingNetwork and encouraged by the Moderators (bet they moderate this post)!

I used to love this place back in the day, but now it is just a miserable place to try and learn about BF games filled by self-righteous pompous jerks. And before you say don't come here then, I do find it amusing to see each one miserable people cry about a video game as if you have nothing else in you life that matters... LOL! Plus sometimes they have good articles about BF.

Edit: This obviously doesn't apply to all members here, unfortunately they don't post very often. :-(

still making new friends?

[Simo Glock]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

And if it comes down to it - i'd rather have 64 players than destructible environments. Gameplay > graphics.

Really? (Friendly voice) I know typing can be misread sometimes, im not trying to sound like an a$$hat.

Have you played BC1?
The Destruction adds alot to the gameplay. Its not just this or that getting blownup for fun or for the looks of it... It can take away cover but also surprisingly it can add cover and places to hide. I expect thats part of the idea for 2.0
Will there be more rumble leftover after a structure comes down?
Just might be..
Not to mention you really feel like you have some power behind your fire.

I think destruction is the best thing in gaming since multiplayer over the internet. I wouldnt trade it for anything.

OMG 64 man on Frostbite with maps 3 times the detail of BF2, DICE at the top of their game = Heaven in gaming.

[MR DICE]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

You do make the frostbite engine sound very nice when you put it like that, alot of rounds can pan out the same way, and feel the same, but having something that makes every game different sounds brillinat, plus i love places to hide

[imported_Smooth]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

To: Troybob
Im not a programmer, but I have played Project Reality mod where they have similar problems with destructible objects and lag.If you want to go deeper, you can search their forum, for answers. I also remember that BF 1942 had some servers with 128 players, and it lagged like grazy. So lag is related to player number too. We must give EA credits for expanding gaming possibility's, we can whine, but theres not too many games like BF series. I think EA-s sales department does good job, unlike PR department which keeps us oftenly in darkness. When I heard about BF 1943 first time, I was really confused, but when they said, what it was made for, then it made sense. It seems that they want to satisfy different age groups, instead giving them all-in-one wonder like BF has been so far and Im OK with that. I just hope that BFBC2 and BF3 will be more mature player oriented.

[Simo Glock]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

You do make the frostbite engine sound very nice when you put it like that, alot of rounds can pan out the same way, and feel the same, but having something that makes every game different sounds brillinat, plus i love places to hide

I know, its my favorite part of BC and its not just good for snipers.
It also works good for Demo guys.

Everyone knows that a sniper might choose a 2nd story window as a perch.
So if you stick your lil head near the glass or open hole it makes an easy target. Its rather easy to spot someone in the window even at m24 or .50 cal range.

But if you find an attic in need of shingles it can be nearly impossible to see the snipers profile against all the jagged hole / frame work behind and around him. If the sniper is good :evil:
However if the backside gets blow out then you better GTFO ASAP or you'll look like a bird on a wire. So its a changing battefield.

Another thing that makes it great is that falling trees can tip you off to a sneaky tank or even a sneaky sniper.
One of my favorite's is a defensive spot where I take out a tree with my knife to get a clean 'hull down" view just inside a bush with my m24.
I hope no one sees the tree drop tho :shock:

Another is a crater.. A good'ol Crater can be used for so many things... My buddy got the 20 squad spawns patch while hiding in a flipping crater! Pisses me off, I cant get that patch for anything.

But they hide landmines well.. chances they get runover are slimmer, due the the fact ive had a tank miss my head while down in one, but worth a try anyway.

Again I cant wait to let loose on the troops below with the Prop planes in 1943. Hopefully we get a nice 500lb bomb too :yay:

All in all I hope theres no motion sensors or "radar" to auto spot people in upcoming BF's.. IMO its the worst new thing since BF2.
Lighting up spotted enemies or hit indicators im good with.
Lets all be happy that theres no dreaded Kill Cam in BF. Now theres the noobyest thing ever... worse than auto health regen.

[johnnyhavoc]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

Completely agree!!! I remember Midway, I still think back fondly to flying a Corsair against other fighters then strafing the airfield only to lend a hand bombing a destroyer as our own destroyer engaged it. Once I died it was my turn to sink some ships using the submarine. Then oh no they captured the island!!! Beach landing outside the airfield with 12 guys from landing craft as planes buzzed over head and our battleship bombarded their defenses. I loved being the artillery on maps like El Alamein and having a friend spot targets for me as I lobbed shells onto occupied positions! It forced you to look at the big picture. Ok, we occupy this spot but where are these rounds raining in from? Go out and find it and remove 1 more threat. Only problem is you realize that artillery was softening your position and here's an armored column creeping up the hill.

Sorry all other military or war based shooters you can't compare to moments like that when Battlefield is notorious for a billion combos of the same scenario. BF2 was great, granted I would have preferred they found a way to expand the game without making players pay. At least then the battles would get bigger and better rather than more fragmented. With 2142 my friends and I play every Monday night. The titan aspect was a nice touch though the fewer number of vehicles (least amount of any BF game) being replaced by "unlocks" doesn't let it achieve that same state of awe as 1942.
The infantry and small arms tweaks and refinement which took place after 1942 leading into BF2 and even more so in 2142 did so much to improve the series standing.

Still you are totally right, diversity is key!!! I'd add versatility and flexibility too. Big maps with a range of control points are always fun. Some congested areas where vehicles won't do you any good just for the infantry fighting lovers, more remote points for vehicle battles or air support and superiority. It's stuff like that which sets BF apart from all the other cruddy games.

I stopped playing games like Brothers in Arms, Medal of Honor and Call of Duty back in 2002, when Bf1942 came out!!! They are pretty games but I've had my share of running around in a rat maze-like maps equal to maybe 3 city blocks in size and going in circles. In fact prior to Bf1942 there was "Hidden and Dangerous" a tactical fire-team based WW2 game and when I saw how vast the maps were and the vehicle control I thought, "The perfect game would be like this with more players and less technical".

Sorry I'm jaded but I was weened on Doom (yeah 1993 Doom) and Duke Nukem 3D so I've had more than my share of deathmatch, team deathmatch and capture the flag. It gets old fast running in circles or decamping snipers. Unfortunately that's about all the current shooters like the above mentioned have to offer.

Bf1942 had 32 players when it was 1st released and that was '02. And what was the multiplayer demo? oh yeah f'ing Wake Island for the 1st of 5 times!!! Many games like MOHAA only supported 16 and again that was way back then. Sadly though the thinking is to make games for the console gamers and not solely PC gamers and in doing so we have to roll our clocks back 7 years and only allow 16-24 players. Sorry but some of us have grown up past that. We know how good PC games can be because we've played them. No need to dumb down, spoon feed or hold our hands. Make Battlefield games for PC gamers and maybe in 5 years when the console mentalities catch up they can have more than 24 players but don't force us to languish in low player limit limbo with poor map sizes.

[Simo Glock]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

It was a good read and I agreed right up to this point..

We know how good PC games can be because we've played them. No need to dumb down, spoon feed or hold our hands. Make Battlefield games for PC gamers and maybe in 5 years when the console mentalities catch up they can have more than 24 players but don't force us to languish in low player limit limbo with poor map sizes

I was given Wolfenstein 3D on a floppydisk.
I was writing my own choose your own adventure tales in basic.
I was flying All of Microproses flightsims when there was nothing but wireframes.

I own a console, I like the console, I like to Snipe, hide, Setup traps, Throw frags, Stand infront of tanks and blow them to bits. I like to shoot Helos down with a main tank, I like to airstrike tanks that never heard it coming. I like to charge in and knife everybody in sight. If you dont like BFBC then you dont know a good game til I blow you where the pampers is.

Please, give the console thing a rest..

[karzac]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

great words, EA and DICE are full of sh1t they tell you somthing in a way that you get a total diffrent picture, remember when they said the map sizes would change depending on how many people are in the server(on there own, so they made us believe) tanks can shoot through fences and some thin objects..... D.esigning I.ncredibly C.rap E.ntertainment ....never used to be the case.... 24 players.. jeez Moh spearhead can do 32 players and them maps are tiny:shakehead:

[Leopardi]

Re: Diversification is the Name of the Game, Part 3 (Editorial)

It was a good read and I agreed right up to this point..



I was given Wolfenstein 3D on a floppydisk.
I was writing my own choose your own adventure tales in basic.
I was flying All of Microproses flightsims when there was nothing but wireframes.

I own a console, I like the console, I like to Snipe, hide, Setup traps, Throw frags, Stand infront of tanks and blow them to bits. I like to shoot Helos down with a main tank, I like to airstrike tanks that never heard it coming. I like to charge in and knife everybody in sight. If you dont like BFBC then you dont know a good game til I blow you where the pampers is.

Please, give the console thing a rest..

Yeah it's decent quick fun, but it's still stupid that PC users would have to play with the same amount of players while we could enjoy much more. You don't get the same war feeling with 24p.