Why did you stop playing bf2?

1. I hated it when they removed the ability to jump and fire. Sure, it stopped the bunny hopping, but now I can't pounce on unsuspecting victems with the DAO-12 anymore. :(

2. It doesnt matter how awesome my system is; rockets still magically fly through the back of tanks, shots that should have hit don't register, and so forth.

3. Booster packs (WTF!?)

I still play, just not as often as I used to.
 
I still play it, but just not nearly as much.

Tired of crashing to desktop and getting 30 fps in 64 man rooms. :(
I want to try Oblivion :)
 
DeathFromBelow said:
1. I hated it when they removed the ability to jump and fire. Sure, it stopped the bunny hopping, but now I can't pounce on unsuspecting victems with the DAO-12 anymore. :(

2. It doesnt matter how awesome my system is; rockets still magically fly through the back of tanks, shots that should have hit don't register, and so forth.

3. Booster packs (WTF!?)

I still play, just not as often as I used to.
Click to expand...

QTF

this guy summed of all my fustrations with BF2.
 
BF2 has to go down as the quickist turn from most impressive game to most dissapointing. I think it all started when Special Forces was released. Immediatly I saw the community splitting up as people flocked to literally different version of the game.

Normally when a popular FPS comes out (UT99, UT2k4, Quake 1, 2, 3) performance gets better as patches are introduced, and the community responds with better performance tweaks. BF2 seemed to get worse with SF.

With each of the previous legendary FPS's (UT, Quake, HL etc) the community and the developers worked together to release updates that improved the overall games. After all Counter Strike came from a Mod. BF2, while allowing mods, still doesnt integrate them well at all into the community because of the ranking and stat system.

The biggest problem with BF2 and ultimatly EA, is the lack of community updates. Features are not introduced in patches, just bug fixes (if you can call them fixes). Epic, ID, and Valve are very interested in giving the community the most value out of the money we spend. They do this by relesing quality patches that include new maps, performance benefits, and FREE updates.

I've given up on BF2 and most likely will not buy 2142 because of EA's past. Instead, I am getting into World of Warcraft casually, and playing UT2k4 on a regular basis. Both games have more polish than EA's shoes that were shined by the suckers who bought the booster packs.

Jeff
 
While I used to 'hate' EA, they did a great job with Fight Night Round 3 and have nearly won me back.

BF2 is bugged to hell though.

btw. The 'hate' EA bandwagon is old and not 'cool' anymore for those interested, LOL.
 
The one time I did play I got base raped 3 spawns in a row by friggin n00bs before I could move far enough away or even find them to shoot. Plus I hate the whole booster pack idea. It seems like you are having to pay for a patch IMO.
 
Skolar said:
The one time I did play I got base raped 3 spawns in a row by friggin n00bs before I could move far enough away or even find them to shoot. Plus I hate the whole booster pack idea. It seems like you are having to pay for a patch IMO.
Click to expand...

Then call it an Expansion pack. Happy? lol Who CARES what they call it... it was an expansion pack, just smaller. (AND cheaper)
 
Skolar said:
The one time I did play I got base raped 3 spawns in a row by friggin n00bs before I could move far enough away or even find them to shoot. Plus I hate the whole booster pack idea. It seems like you are having to pay for a patch IMO.
Click to expand...

So to you, new content (maps, weapons, vehicles) is a patch?
 
Glimmer and I are in the same boat: We've NEVER understood the argument that says, "I feel like I'm paying for a patch". It's a frickin' expansion pack! LOL
 
GlimmerMan said:
So to you, new content (maps, weapons, vehicles) is a patch?
Click to expand...
I know its not a patch, it just seems like it. I've always felt that expansion packs should bring truely new and innovative features to a game. Patches should bring fixes, new guns, and maps. The vehicles should come in an expansion pack. The "booster pack" seems like a marketing ploy also. Just like some stupid game cards like Yghio,however you spell it, and magic.
 
The main reason I stopped playing was I spent too much time in WoW and convinced all my friends to play WoW also. Basically, we all just stopped playing BF2 (and other FPSs) at once and I never really went back. Beyond that, there was nothing that made me really want to come back to the game. I used to ALWAYS be the victim of the wrong colored name bug, either with my teammates shooting me or me shooting my teammates. Performance wasn't anything great despite only having decent graphics.
 
Skolar said:
I know its not a patch, it just seems like it. I've always felt that expansion packs should bring truely new and innovative features to a game. Patches should bring fixes, new guns, and maps. The vehicles should come in an expansion pack. The "booster pack" seems like a marketing ploy also. Just like some stupid game cards like Yghio,however you spell it, and magic.
Click to expand...

Lemme get this straight...

You think expansion packs should have "stuff".
Patches should have "stuff".
Booster packs are just "marketing" even though they have "stuff".

Holy confusion, Batman! :confused:
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
Lemme get this straight...

You think expansion packs should have "lots more stuff stuff".
Patches should have "little stuff". (keeps the community alive and active)
Booster packs are just "marketing" even though they have "stuff". (yes it is, its not enough to be a expansion, but they don't want to give stuff away either)

Holy confusion, Batman! :confused:
Click to expand...


There, my thoughts
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
Lemme get this straight...

You think expansion packs should have "stuff".
Patches should have "stuff".
Booster packs are just "marketing" even though they have "stuff".

Holy confusion, Batman! :confused:
Click to expand...
He probably means the amount of "stuff" in each type of thing. Ideally, patches should, over time, add a little bit to the game beyond simple bug fixes. Not a lot, but something. Expansion packs should add a significant amount to the game - enough new maps to consider it a new game, new gameplay modes, new models, new weapons, etc.
 
dotK said:
He probably means the amount of "stuff" in each type of thing. Ideally, patches should, over time, add a little bit to the game beyond simple bug fixes. Not a lot, but something. Expansion packs should add a significant amount to the game - enough new maps to consider it a new game, new gameplay modes, new models, new weapons, etc.
Click to expand...
Right there. DotK got it right. Big stuff comes in expansion packs and little stuff comes in patches.
 
I played the demo for a while and it was way too arcadey + poorly optimized engine + infantry/vechiles not meshed together properly.
 
Skolar said:
Right there. DotK got it right. Big stuff comes in expansion packs and little stuff comes in patches.
Click to expand...

Then it's all symantecs, I guess. What's your definition of big/small? That's the bottom line. EA's definition of big is smaller than your definition of big. lol
 
Valve have created enough updates and new content for their games to make up an expansion pack or two, but it's all been given to their customers for free. EA just suck cocks, it's that simple. And funnily enough, they're valve's distributor now, aren't they?
 
meatfestival said:
Valve have created enough updates and new content for their games to make up an expansion pack or two, but it's all been given to their customers for free. EA just suck cocks, it's that simple. And funnily enough, they're valve's distributor now, aren't they?
Click to expand...

No. Vivendi has published their stuff. UNLESS the EA juggernaut has their claws in Valve, too... *gasp*

It's a free country. If you want to charge people for content and make a profit: congrats! i.e. WoW charges every MONTH for stuff. They're successful. They evil, too? Your cable company charges every month... are they evil? You get me drift. :D
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
Then it's all symantecs, I guess. What's your definition of big/small? That's the bottom line. EA's definition of big is smaller than your definition of big. lol
Click to expand...
Meh, its enough to keep my hard earned cash in my pocket and out of theirs.
 
Then it's all symantecs, I guess. What's your definition of big/small? That's the bottom line. EA's definition of big is smaller than your definition of big. lol
Click to expand...

That's the real problem with EA. When EA produced titles for other companies, we got great games with loads of content, but they got less cash.

Now we get not-so-good games at about the same price. The best comparison is Westwood's original C&C games (All of them) to C&C Generals. Even EA's racing games have less content now (compare NFS Hot Pursuit 1 & 2).

You would think that by combining game development into one central company that they could produce better games for more profit, and I'm sure thats what they want to do. They just need to work on the better part.


Staying on topic,
As an addition to my last post, I just got Oblivion...
 
DFB I totally agree with what you posted. I think EA's games have had less content in recent releases.

I, too, have found the sweet nectar of life that is Oblivion. :D

(BF2 still has sweet nectar for me...)
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
It's a free country. If you want to charge people for content and make a profit: congrats! i.e. WoW charges every MONTH for stuff. They're successful. They evil, too? Your cable company charges every month... are they evil? You get me drift. :D
Click to expand...
Blizzard actually hosts servers for you to play on. EA does not (I think they have some up, but not enough to accomodate the entire player base at once). That's a big difference.
 
dotK said:
Blizzard actually hosts servers for you to play on. EA does not (I think they have some up, but not enough to accomodate the entire player base at once). That's a big difference.
Click to expand...

Your comparison doesn't work. EA doesn't charge a monthly fee.
 
1. The internet game browser was broken out of the box.
2. EA
3. BUGS
4. Horrible Physics
5. Dice releases patches that introduce more bugs then they fix.
6. All my friends quit playing for the same reasons.
 
anyone feel like PM'img me their cd key sense they dont play any more?


I can wish:)
 
Also the frame rate is over the place, it goes from 80fps down to 40, back up to 70, back down to 20, back up to 50, back down to 2 , the back up to 80frames a sec.

When I join the server(which takes for ever to complete the verify client thing), its really really laggy and I get angry has soon has that happens, because the enemy kill's me straight away.

I just hope EA/Dice can release a patch for it that actualy makes this game run smooth, and I mean smooth like Call of Duty 2 smooth (That's a clean engine-Bug Free).

And the Editor really sucks also, takes forever to paint the map and when the thing crashes just make thing's more worst.
 
I've had to turn it down to where it doesn't even look that great just to get it to not stutter with 1 gig of ram.

Another thing that bugs me is you get no sense that your bullets hurt people, really annoying.
 
WhyYouLoveMe said:
Your comparison doesn't work. EA doesn't charge a monthly fee.
Click to expand...
Instead they're charging for things like "booster packs."
 
I still love playing this game but its so much goddamn work just to play it. Pretty much all the bugs that people are mentioning as well as inordinately long wait times are what killed it for me. Its so much easier and faster to startup COD2 or CS:S and get to fragging. My game time is pretty limited and it kills me to spend a lot of it waiting on load times and crash/disconnect recovery. I would play BF2 a lot more but when I only have an hour or so to play, its much more satisfying to play something that gets me in the action quickly which I'm sad to say, simply cannot be done with BF2.
 
cgrant26 said:
I still love playing this game but its so much goddamn work just to play it. Pretty much all the bugs that people are mentioning as well as inordinately long wait times are what killed it for me. Its so much easier and faster to startup COD2 or CS:S and get to fragging. My game time is pretty limited and it kills me to spend a lot of it waiting on load times and crash/disconnect recovery. I would play BF2 a lot more but when I only have an hour or so to play, its much more satisfying to play something that gets me in the action quickly which I'm sad to say, simply cannot be done with BF2.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. This is exactly why i kept playing WarRock even tho i also have BF2 which is actually technically better. Too much launch time.

From desktop to actually getting in the game. In the time it takes to load up a BF2 map, i'd almost be done with a round of WarRock.

In WarRock, you launch the game, after a brief loading time (Gameguard verification can actually take longer than the actual game loading!) you get dropped on the main screen, and you simply click through the menus and after around 10 seconds waiting for the game to load, you're in the game. Total time from desktop is about 1 minute, maybe less. It's THAT fast!!!

How long does it normally take you guys to get in a BF2 game? How much time do you waste waiting for the menu load? For the server list to appear? For the verification to finish? They all add up pretty big.
 
Why did I stop? It was too unorganized and I'm not really big into clans.

I would start playing and if I was on the ground I would get killed either instantly buy a vehicle or aircraft, and if it was another person I wouldn't even know where tehy where half the time.

If I was in a chopper or jet I couldn't kill anyone yet I got taken out buy what it seems like was anyone who fired thier handgun at me.

If I was anti aircraft I didn't shoot down anyone because the guided/heatseakers didn't guid or seek shit.

If I was a tank someone would sneak up on my and c4 me. Of course, if it was me trying to c4 a tank they would cut me in half before I even got close to them.

The list goes on and on.

Did I suck? Yeah, probably but I sucked at css for months but I stilled played and now I'm great.

BF2 just beat me and made me not want to play.

I even tried it twice. Got it last for christmas and sold it, got it again a month ago and sold it.
 
Sly said:
Excellent point. This is exactly why i kept playing WarRock even tho i also have BF2 which is actually technically better. Too much launch time.

From desktop to actually getting in the game. In the time it takes to load up a BF2 map, i'd almost be done with a round of WarRock.

In WarRock, you launch the game, after a brief loading time (Gameguard verification can actually take longer than the actual game loading!) you get dropped on the main screen, and you simply click through the menus and after around 10 seconds waiting for the game to load, you're in the game. Total time from desktop is about 1 minute, maybe less. It's THAT fast!!!

How long does it normally take you guys to get in a BF2 game? How much time do you waste waiting for the menu load? For the server list to appear? For the verification to finish? They all add up pretty big.
Click to expand...

Dude you have a good point. It DOES take a while to "get going" in BF2 just to frag somebody. Jumpin' into CS:S is lightning compared to BF2.
 
Json23 said:
1- Because it was boring

2- Because it runs like garbage

3- Because the Net-code runs like garbage

4- Because it was boring
Click to expand...
all of those except 2 for me, it just got old really fast
 
b/c my friends stopped playing. And with out friends in your squad helping you to actually accomplish goals and chat, its not as fun.

Plus too many people steal MY chopper! Yeah, ok so I'M a chopper whore!

& lastly, b/c it takes too much time to play. LIke I have know I have at least 30 minutes to get some gaming in. B/c it takes 5 minutes to boot, load map, connect to server, verify client data, etc!

And I have a dual core 4Ghz Pentium D, with 2Gb of ram & 7900GTX and a WD 74Gb Raptor. The only thing I could do to make it faster would be RAID 2 Raptors so maps would load faster. (which I guess will be my next upgrade, when I'm ready to reinstall WinXP)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top