# Bad Company 2 for the PC; don't hold your breath!



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

> We've balanced a lot of things since the beta, and hopefully sometime next month I will have time to write up a blog post on what we've changed. It's alot, and unfortunately I'm totally freaking swamped getting the game done. (It's gotta be done in January so Sony and Microsoft can certify it for release. *PC version gets a bit more time since it doesn't need to go through cert, but it needs it so we can support ATI, nVidia, AMD, Intel, etc.)*


source
  
I find it hilarious they need more time to support essential features for the game to actually run on the PC.  Don't hold your breath folks after reading this there is no telling when the PC version will surface.  Hopefully, it's on time and this was posted in error!


----------



## assaulter_99 (Dec 22, 2009)

I d rather let them have more time than get a half assed port. knowing dice, I assume we can trust them.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

I don't think it take extra time to support Intel/AMD cpus, etc.  
To me this reads as if they are just getting started on the PC version.  Not so much about them optimizing the game for the PC. I still find it odd there are no PC specific videos for this game and a demo is assumed to be released in a few weeks.


----------



## assaulter_99 (Dec 22, 2009)

We won't know for sure till the games ship out. I don't think that they are starting only now since the beta will be up shortly, but you never know! If they take more time and give us something good (mass effect comes to mind) well it aint too bad waiting a lil more.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

assaulter_99 said:


> We won't know for sure till the games ship out. I don't think that they are starting only now since the beta will be up shortly, but you never know! If they take more time and give us something good (mass effect comes to mind) well it aint too bad waiting a lil more.



Oh I understand trust me and in a situation like that it makes sense if more features are added.  However, the post quoted in the OP comes off different.  IE: they need extra time to support cpus and video cards.  Those are not added features which is why I created this thread.  However, let's wait and see if the demo actually does come out in a few weeks or not.  That will, IMO, tell the real story of where they are in development of this game.  Again, I hope that information quoted in the OP was simply posted in error.


----------



## assaulter_99 (Dec 22, 2009)

I guess we just have to cross our fingers. 

But its sad really, I believe that in the future we'll get more and more games released after the initial console releases. How many games have done that? The main reason they have behind this is piracy, even though they shove us dumb excuses. Thats why i lol'ed when cod:mw2's xbox 360 release was leaked on torrents before the pc version!


----------



## 3870x2 (Dec 22, 2009)

assaulter_99 said:


> I guess we just have to cross our fingers.
> 
> But its sad really, I believe that in the future we'll get more and more games released after the initial console releases. How many games have done that? The main reason they have behind this is piracy, even though they shove us dumb excuses. Thats why i lol'ed when cod:mw2's xbox 360 release was leaked on torrents before the pc version!



that was good for micro$oft.  Half of all the xbox 360s in the entire world were banned in a week.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

If I told you the PC closed beta has already started, would that make you feel better?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 22, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> If I told you the PC closed beta has already started, would that make you feel better?


cadaveca right it has in fact started. No worries man. I'm watching this game like a hawk.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

Here(from Dec 1st):


> A lot of you have been asking for the minimum hardware specs to run Frostbite games, more specifically for Battlefield Bad Company 2 & Battlefield 1943's minimum requirements, and today is the lucky day.  Below, you likely skipped ahead and read them already, are the minimum and recommended hardware specs for running BFBC 2 and BF1943.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Release for console versions is in march.



> We wanted to update you, and slow the flood of tweets, on questions surrounding the BFBC2 PC Beta being cancelled.  *I'll get right to it and say "the BFBC2 PC Beta is not cancelled"*.  Now this all started due to changes made to an earlier blog that removed the PC Beta from the details and the reason for this was the plan changed. With the huge success of the PS3 Beta we decided to drastically increase the PC Beta's capacity to insure as many people as possible could participate.  Unfortunately this meant we had to delay the Beta to very early next year giving us more planning time to make it happen and implement more optimizations.
> 
> Here is a recap of the current PC features, and we can now confirm DX11 support with more details to come later!
> 
> ...




You are making a mountain out of a molehill, ECH.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

If there is a PC closed beta out then it would make the information quoted in the OP in error then.


----------



## assaulter_99 (Dec 22, 2009)

Seems like its the case. But then, maybe they need more time to polish it after, cause betas are know to be bug fests.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 22, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> If there is a PC closed beta out then it would make the information quoted in the OP in error then.


There is a closed beta which I was to be a part of. Thats how I know my friend.  However from what I hear they are going above and beyond with the PC version so there may in fact be a delay. But its for the good.

DICE basically wants to school IW with this game. Its almost personal with them from what I hear.

FYI: https://www.combattesting.com/


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> If there is a PC closed beta out then it would make the information quoted in the OP in error then.



How so? Tsalking about the console versions has nothing to do with PC version, really, other than to explain the delay in Open beta launch. I do not get the same impression form the EA forum post...I hear him saying that the open PC beta is on hold ATM as they finalize the console versions to go out for qualification in early January. When that is done, the open pc beta will start. They can then dedicate the full team to the PC version, at least, assuming there are no issues with console qualification.


FYI, closed Beta of DICE games is generally months, if not longer, than open betas.


----------



## assaulter_99 (Dec 22, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> DICE basically wants to school IW with this game. Its almost personal with them from what I hear.



Yeah I read an article bout that. Dice wants to  IW. Its pretty funny to see EA caring at least for the pc community.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> Here(from Dec 1st):
> 
> 
> Release for console versions is in march.
> ...


Actually no I am not, your quoted information was prior to the posted information in the OP (IE considered it an update if you will).  I think this is a typical cause of blaming the messenger.  I'm not the person who  said what was quoted in the OP.





cadaveca said:


> How so? Tsalking about the console versions has nothing to do with PC version, really, other than to explain the delay in Open beta launch. I do not get the same impression form the EA forum post...I hear him saying that the open PC beta is on hold ATM as they finalize the console versions to go out for qualification in early January. When that is done, the open pc beta will start. They can then dedicate the full team to the PC version, at least, assuming there are no issues with console qualification.
> 
> 
> FYI, closed Beta of DICE games is generally months, if not longer, than open betas.


Simple, as I never mentioned or implied the console version .


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Actually no I am not, your quoted information was prior to the posted information in the OP.  I think this is a typical cause of blaming the messenger.  I'm not the person who  said what was quoted in the OP.



True, but you are misinterpreting events here.  There is no indication in that post that the PC version is delayed, or anything. Open Beta Timing are not reflections on retail products....in fact, this is the same situation as 2142, beta-wise.

You suggest PC version may never come out, and I say that is not the case, and you are reading too much between the lines of that post.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 22, 2009)

assaulter_99 said:


> Yeah I read an article bout that. Dice wants to  IW. Its pretty funny to see EA caring at least for the pc community.



It has nothing to do with the PC community. Its a pride/money thing. They have to one up IW to gain followers. That and IW talked a lot of trash at DICE. We are just benefitting from it 



cadaveca said:


> True, but you are misinterpreting events here.  There is no indication in that post that the PC version is delayed, or anything. Open Beta Timing are not reflections on retail products....in fact, this is the same situation as 2142, beta-wise.



No its not. 2142 never hit the consoles so there was no threat of a crappy port.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

Yes, but 2142 closed beta(which I was a part of, you know this) was MONTHS before open beta, which was just a short tiem before release. They actually changed very little from Open beta to retail...this is what I am getting at.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> True, but you are misinterpreting events here.  There is no indication in that post that the PC version is delayed, or anything. Open Beta Timing are not reflections on retail products....in fact, this is the same situation as 2142, beta-wise.
> 
> You suggest PC version may never come out, and I say that is not the case, and you are reading too much between the lines of that post.


No, I am not as I said lets wait and see about the demo.  I think you are misinterpreting my posts here.  As this is the second time you are implied something I've not expressed. And, as TheMailMan78 mentioned there was no console version of BF2142.


----------



## assaulter_99 (Dec 22, 2009)

assaulter_99 said:


> Yeah I read an article bout that. Dice wants to  IW. Its pretty funny to see EA caring at least for the pc community.





TheMailMan78 said:


> It has nothing to do with the PC community. Its a pride/money thing. They have to one up IW to gain followers. That and IW talked a lot of trash at DICE. We are just benefitting from it



Yeah thats why I said it was funny, we all know we are just $$$ in EA's eyes!


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> As this is the second time you are implied something I've not expressed.





EastCoasthandle said:


> *Don't hold your breath folks after reading this there is no telling when the PC version will surface.  Hopefully, it's on time and this was posted in error!*






EastCoasthandle said:


> *To me this reads as if they are just getting started on the PC version.  Not so much about them optimizing the game for the PC.* I still find it odd there are no PC specific videos for this game and a demo is assumed to be released in a few weeks.




It's called NDA, #1. Only those shown previously to actually help on closed betas, are in current closed betas. Open beta will be just that...completely open. They will need to test server-side stuff fully, as well as a small bit of quality-control, so there will be a bit-by-bit addition of beta players.

PC version has DX9, DX10, and DX11. The call for DX11-based pcs for the closed beta weas some time ago, FYI. Consoles are not subject to three codepaths, and as such, will tkae more testing. Like really, ECH, I was shocked by your post, hence my reaction. Nevermind I do not beleive you to be correct, nor do I beleive the post indicated any issues that might affect the release.



EastCoasthandle said:


> And, as TheMailMan78 mentioned there was no console version of BF2142.



I could care less about console versions. I'm only talking about PC versions. I'm on the PS3 closed beta, but hate using a controller. Based on what I saw on the PS3, there's little work left.

No hard feelings dude, I just think you are wrong.

Here's teh full post:



> The UAV1 replaces the role of the laser designator from BC1. It's powerful, but only 1 can be deployed and it can be shot down.
> 
> We've changed the mortar strike to use binoculars, so you can zoom in on that tank or sniper and call hell down on their heads. Or just pull it up and spot targets if you're using a shotgun or a low zoom scope.
> 
> We've balanced a lot of things since the beta, and hopefully sometime next month I will have time to write up a blog post on what we've changed. It's alot, and unfortunately I'm totally freaking swamped getting the game done. (It's gotta be done in January so Sony and Microsoft can certify it for release. PC version gets a bit more time since it doesn't need to go through cert, but it needs it so we can support ATI, nVidia, AMD, Intel, etc.)




Post is from two days ago. Where's the indication of delay?


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Dec 22, 2009)

It is possible the post was accurate, but like 4 months old and whoever posted is just way behind.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

cadaveca said:


> It's called NDA, #1. Only those shown previously to actually help on closed betas, are in current closed betas. Open beta will be just that...completely open. They will need to test server-side stuff fully, as well as a small bit of quality-control, so there will be a bit-by-bit addition of beta players.
> 
> PC version has DX9, DX10, and DX11. The call for DX11-based pcs for the closed beta weas some time ago, FYI. Consoles are not subject to three codepaths, and as such, will tkae more testing. Like really, ECH, I was shocked by your post, hence my reaction. Nevermind I do not beleive you to be correct, nor do I beleive the post indicated any issues that might affect the release.
> 
> ...



Your posts are getting nonsensical and off topic here.  None of what you said made any sense to why you've replied to my post.  Earlier, you misinterpret aspects of my post now you are posting this just to argue. 
Here read this:


> I find it hilarious they need more time to support essential features for the game to actually run on the PC.  Don't hold your breath folks after reading this there is no telling when the PC version will surface.  *Hopefully, it's on time and this was posted in error*





EastCoasthandle said:


> If there is a PC closed beta out then it would make the information quoted in the OP in error then.


Which clearly debunks your opinion which you clearly misunderstood. 





TheLaughingMan said:


> It is possible the post was accurate, but like 4 months old and whoever posted is just way behind.


Exactly,  I find it rather funny that cadaveca is taking this so seriously.


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> *Don't hold your breath folks after reading this there is no telling when the PC version will surface. *



This is why...lol...what's to misunderstand? 

And I'm not taking it so serious, dude, that's just my personality. I think you are taking a comment as to why there are things in the current console betas that have been changed...to mean that the pc version will be delayed. As my quote above of you says.

Conversation man, that's all this is. You may call my posts off-topic, when really, PC version does need more testing than consoles...this is a given. The post you originally quoted said jsut this..that the pc version needs more work. It didn't say "from ths point on"...


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 22, 2009)

Yes, but there was more to it then what you quoted.  If you put it all together you would see (along with the other posts) that I didn't imply or intent to imply an absolute about the situation.  I hope it more clear for you now


----------



## cadaveca (Dec 22, 2009)

Oh, I always understood, ECH. I just find it shocking you feel this way, as we have access to the same info( I think), and I do not get the same impression as you do. Having been part of all BF closed betas, I see nothing amiss.

PC beta was delayed, IMHO, to roll in changes from PS3 beta, and because they used servers for PC beta for PS3 beta, to match demand.



DICE's open betas have always been "almost retail", and to me, have been used to generate hype, and are more of a demo, than a beta. The focus on consoles is a direct attack on the COD franchise...if they can get console players playing thier beta, instead of COD, they've done a good thing.

They are in final steps to get out the console "gold" masters to the console makers, and are under extra pressure due to the holidays. They stopped work on the pc version to do this, and will focus entirely on the pc version once the "gold dics" go out of the office.

^^^that's what that post says to me.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Dec 22, 2009)

Screw this. Come here and talk positive!

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=111094


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Dec 22, 2009)

On that same note EA and DICE has also admitted that work on the PC version was being done while they were working on the console version.  The only debate earlier was not about if or when, but about the Beta itself.  Many Battlefield fans are PC gamers and thought it was a bit unfair that a game, granted it was a console version of BF, that was going to be on PC did not get a Beta.

They did push back the Beta for PC to ensure they could deal with the console version by the holiday season, but the entire PC version was not put on hold.  I am guessing, as stated before, the Beta for PC will be 98% retail and the last 2% will be working out compatibility bugs related to GPU's.  While the console Beta was an actual test for balance, gameplay, game modes, etc. to make sure the game is the best in can be.

In short, I personally do not believe this will delay the PC version's release at all.  I also think the PC beta due in January was mainly delayed because it is A. an Open beta to anyone who wants some (larger scale), and B. will just be to workout compatibility and GPU identification bugs.

So in short PC Beta = Early released PC demo.  Also remember this is an franchise started on PC with decades of PC gaming under their belts.  PC is an environment DICE knows well and will not have nearly as many issues with as they did with consoles.


----------



## rpsgc (Dec 22, 2009)

> *With the huge success of the PS3 Beta we decided to drastically increase the PC Beta's capacity to insure as many people as possible could participate*. Unfortunately this meant we had to delay the Beta to very early next year giving us more planning time to make it happen and implement more optimizations.
> 
> http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/bat...9/11/25/the-pc-beta-sky-is-falling-not.aspx##



OH NOES THE PCS BETAZ NOT GONNS HAPPENZS!!

It was delayed to increase the max number of players and to make it even better. They delay it for a few weeks (a month) and people already start making doomsday threads about it not coming out and other nonsense? Talk about overreacting.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Dec 23, 2009)

I don't mind letting them have the time, yes it kills me, but I would rather have it polished on PC, not just some lame PC game. I have already played it on PS3, trust me, it owns faces! If the PC beta gets pushed back past Jan thats not a big deal, they have a deadline to meet, and once Jan passes that means the console game is done, anytime after that is all PC time. Games usually go gold about a month ahead of the release date, so that gives them a good solid month to polish up the PC version. 

And I don't buy into the whole "they don't care about PC", because if they didn't, there wouldn't be DX11 support, heck MW2 doesn't even have DX10 support... The game looked amazing on the PS3, I can't wait to see how it looks actually playing it on PC, heck if they even had to push the PC release back a month, so be it, just means more loving for the game.


----------



## @RaXxaa@ (Dec 23, 2009)

Mainly its built for consoles so they perfect it 4 that first then turns to pc and does perfect that..... but i would wait instead of getting a news of no dedicated servers


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 23, 2009)

rpsgc said:


> OH NOES THE PCS BETAZ NOT GONNS HAPPENZS!!
> 
> It was delayed to increase the max number of players and to make it even better. They delay it for a few weeks (a month) and people already start making doomsday threads about it not coming out and other nonsense? Talk about overreacting.



Here let me remind you why I created this thread:


EastCoasthandle said:


> source
> 
> I find it hilarious they need more time to support essential features for the game to actually run on the PC.  Don't hold your breath folks after reading this there is no telling when the PC version will surface.  Hopefully, it's on time and this was posted in error!



Now where in the OP does it state that a beta wasn't coming?  Or, from what original from your reading comprehension was that derived from? It's clear that it is you who has over reacting here .  Next time read the post...


----------



## Muhad (Dec 23, 2009)

Let us hope the game won't be a port.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Dec 23, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Here let me remind you why I created this thread:
> 
> 
> Now where in the OP does it state that a beta wasn't coming?  Or, from what original from your reading comprehension was that derived from? It's clear that it is you who has over reacting here .  Next time read the post...



Well it stands to reason that a game that will be delayed will have a delayed beta as well.  If a major issue is discovered and needs to be adjusted, the Beta is the first thing that is effected because it would be the testing ground where these kinds of issues are discovered and/or corrected.

Setting that aside, there have been no remorse or information about the release date being changed.  All the speculation about it being changed is a response to the beta being pushed back as people assume this means the release will be as well.  As I have not see any firm information about the release date being changed, I see no reason to discuss it in detail, thus why I adjusted the Beta delay issue.



Muhad said:


> Let us hope the game won't be a port.



Huh?  Well Battlefield is a PC franchise.  PC gamers who love the series ignored bad Company 1 being for console only because they admitted up front they were testing the Frostbyte engine and some other concepts.  its return to PC was inevitable.  All games that go from console to PC or vise versa is a port cause that is what that means.  I think you are trying to say, let us hope it is not CoD: MW 2, which it has already established itself as being the exact opposite of.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 23, 2009)

This will be hilarious if it's true.  Game Stop has released information suggesting that if you pre-order online they will allow you access to the beta which starts Jan 28, 2010 to Feb 25, 2010.  I await confirmation from Dice.  
source


----------



## 3870x2 (Dec 23, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> It has nothing to do with the PC community. Its a pride/money thing. They have to one up IW to gain followers. That and IW talked a lot of trash at DICE. We are just benefitting from it
> 
> 
> 
> No its not. 2142 never hit the consoles so there was no threat of a crappy port.



I would bet my left nut BFBC2 will not outsell modern warfare 2, even if it is better. MW2 holds more CASUAL, while the BFBC2 is more awaited by experienced individuals.


----------



## WhiteNoise (Dec 23, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> To me this reads as if they are just getting started on the PC version.  Not so much about them optimizing the game for the PC.




Huh? I read no such thing in their post. How did you come up with _that_ conclusion? Even your title: *Bad Company 2 for the PC; don't hold your breath!* I think you are jumping to conclusions here.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Dec 23, 2009)

WhiteNoise said:


> Huh? I read no such thing in their post. How did you come up with _that_ conclusion? Even your title: *Bad Company 2 for the PC; don't hold your breath!* I think you are jumping to conclusions here.



Obviously you don't have any proof to the contrary.  So, the only one jumping to conclusions is you based on my opinion .  I think you forgot that we all can have an opinion .   Again, read the OP, the most current information provided by them was that they needed more to time to support cpus and video cards.  That's not optimization per that post. LOL.  Which is why I said I hope that was in error (or perhaps worded incorrectly).

LOL, fun times...


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 10, 2010)

*Update*



EastCoasthandle said:


> This will be hilarious if it's true.  Game Stop has released information suggesting that if you pre-order online they will allow you access to the beta which starts Jan 28, 2010 to Feb 25, 2010.  I await confirmation from Dice.
> source









If this is true the beta release date vs retail release date is starting to make SENSE!!  There was no way to do a proper open beta testing then release the game only a few days later.   Now, you have to worry about the beta being delayed as well.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 10, 2010)

Not buying this at all. Eastcoast. Sorry man but I call BS.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 10, 2010)

I have no invested interest in the game being delay.  Only providing information as it develops.  Therefore, I hope this is not true.  However, I do stand by my personally opinion that the beta release date doesn't mesh with the retail date:
-Beta from Jan 28, 2010 to Feb 25, 2010
-Release date March 2, 2010

If flaws are found and the beta is truly a beta you need more then a week to prep the game to go gold.  Now it would make sense to me if the beta was actually a Demo though but not the other way around.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 10, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I have no invested interest in the game being delay.  Only providing news on it as it develops.  Therefore, I hope this is not true.  However, I do stand by my personally opinion that the beta release date doesn't mesh with the retail date:
> -Beta from Jan 28, 2010 to Feb 25, 2010
> -Release date March 2, 2010
> 
> If flaws are found and the beta is truly a beta you need more then a week to prep the game to go gold.  Now it would make sense to me if the beta was actually a Demo though but not the other way around.



The beta could be prep for a patch and Ive been noticing that developers no longer do demos. They do betas. That way if anything does go wrong they can say "Hey its a beta. What did you expect?" If its a demo the say "The problem is being looked at currently."

FYI I know what your saying and I aint killing the messenger. I just think the news you found is BS. Not you.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 11, 2010)

Holy crap did you hear the new breaking news?






As far as lining up dates on betas, that no longer applies. Star Trek Online is in CLOSED beta right now and that game comes out in Feb I believe, and thats an MMO thats going to require servers to handle thousands of people. I was in the BC 2 PS# beta, was very polished, I didn't notice animation bugs, weapon bugs, vehicle bugs, the game ran great fps wise. All they needed was more maps, which they have already shown some, and foot of play has been out from before the closed beta. I don't buy a screenshot of a lameo chat log, one second I will go create a GordonVanDyke name on some chat program, we can talk for a bit, I will tell you all is good and you don't need to worry, then you can screenshot that and we can post it up showing everyone that everythings alright.


----------



## skylamer (Jan 11, 2010)

hi, itsnot for topic, but eastcoast what is that program that which you chat with gordonVanDyke?!


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 11, 2010)

It's not from him, here's the story behind the sceenshot. 



> A trusted user emailed me the above screenshot of what appears to be a conversation between someone called ScottishSniper and GordonVanDyke(game producer at DICE)



Source


----------



## Kursah (Jan 11, 2010)

I'm not too concerned at this point, I'm sure DICE will have the game ready to rock soon enough. I hope they make the March 2nd release, but if not, I have no doubts it'll be well worth the wait. Thanks to TheMailMan I have a copy of Enemy Territory Quake Wars en route to keep me busy, he suggested us TPU'ers try it out, and it was much better than my first foray (tried Demo 2.0 on steam, has MP in the demo too, that'll keep me busy till the game shows up, that and Torchlight, The Witcher, and WiC: Soviet Assault).

I think BC2 is gonna be a very solid release for 2010, and like I said before if it takes longer than announced, one no suprise in this market, but the welcome suprise will be a game well worth waiting for imo. There have been others recently that were dissapointing enough to not justify purchasing till they hit the bargain bin, so as I already pre-ordered this game, I've put my bet in that this one will kick ass!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 11, 2010)

Why would GordonVanDyke take a picture of such a conversation in the first place? Thats not something you want any evidence of.

Anyways I suggest you get a copy of Quake Wars and join me in battle until March.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 11, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Why would GordonVanDyke take a picture of such a conversation in the first place? Thats not something you want any evidence of.
> 
> Anyways I suggest you get a copy of Quake Wars and join me in battle until March.



I suggest you get a copy of Crysis and play MWLL until Jan 28th. 

I wouldnt be too surprised if the beta was used to pump out a patch for the first week the after the game releases. EA is really into early patches for most of their recent games. Honestly it doesnt matter that much. As long as I get to play the beta for a few weeks I can wait for a proper release if that's what happens.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 11, 2010)

I am just waiting form y Beta code from GayStop to give me access to it.  They should e-mail it to me on Jan. 25th I think they said.

And just as a heads up for anyone thinking of getting the game through the Pre-order, they will ship a copy to you the day of release, so you will not get the game the day it comes out.  You will most likely get it the following week if you pick the free shipping option like I did.

But considering all the free unlocks, I won't be to far behind my crazy, murderous Brothers-in-Arms.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jan 11, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Why would GordonVanDyke take a picture of such a conversation in the first place? Thats not something you want any evidence of.
> 
> Anyways I suggest you get a copy of Quake Wars and join me in battle until March.



battlefield 2142 > quake wars.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

Neither of them were any good.  It's like choosing between crap and vomit.   In any case the supposed news of BC2 being delayed could be fake folks so keep that in mind.  As for the reasons for the 1 week difference between beta and the game going gold?  Sorry, that don't work.  If they go through as planned the release of BC2 to the community it will be considered an early demo not a open/closed beta.  In which any bug fixes would be patched after the game hits the market.  That is not how a beta program works.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jan 11, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Neither of them were any good.  It's like choosing between crap and vomit.   In any case the supposed news of BC2 being delayed could be fake folks so keep that in mind.  As for the reasons for the 1 week difference between beta and the game going gold?  Sorry, that don't work.  If they go through as planned the release of BC2 to the community it will be considered an early demo not a open/closed beta.  In which any bug fixes would be patched after the game hits the market.  That is not how a beta program works.



A beta program works however they want it to work, it is not a static structure.

If they wanted to run the beta for the next 10 years, who is going to stop them? fcc?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

3870x2 said:


> A beta program works however they want it to work, it is not a static structure.
> 
> If they wanted to run the beta for the next 10 years, who is going to stop them? fcc?


No, it is not and really no need to argue about it.  If there are no changes made to final build that goes gold it is not a beta only a demo.  In which the differences between them applying patches to the retail version of the game because they were made aware before or after the game went gold become moot.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jan 11, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> No, it is not and really no need to argue about it.  If there are no changes made to final build that goes gold it is not a beta only a demo.  In which the differences between them applying patches to the retail version of the game because they were made aware before or after the game went gold become moot.



just saying that it is up to them, as far as i know there are no laws that a beta has to abide by.  expect anything.  Or try not to be so obsessed and just get the game in its final release?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

3870x2 said:


> just saying that it is up to them, as far as i know there are no laws that a beta has to abide by.  expect anything.  Or try not to be so obsessed and just get the game in its final release?


There is no obsession when time is needed to make sure that the game is "as bug free as possible" for the final build.  That's the gist of beta period.   No one should want them to rush the game out because someone simply can't wait for it.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

Take note of the PS3 beta as an example and how it lends itself over to the PC version of the game:



> Since all of you reading this want us finishing up the game instead of writing blogs I made this short and sweet.  Attached is a change-list of *130 Changes/Fixes* .txt I snagged from Alan "Demize99" Kertz USB drive.  One of my favorites is "Added environment specific camouflage to all vehicles."  Comment your favorite too, we'd love to know what it is.  You can also twitter it to OfficialBFBC2 and again, thank you for all those that had the opportunity to participate, as you can see it was incredibly valuable. See you on the PC Beta (Jan 28th), Console Demo (TBD), and then the real deal Battlefield (Mar 2nd & 5th 2010) that will rock your souls! :-D


With roughly 2 months before release this is how a beta should be properly done.  Apparently they have no problem doing this on the console.  And, because of this the console may actually get the demo. 
source
change log
Unfortunately, the PS3 is no PC so we would need our own change list.  But we as PC gamers may only see changes made to the game as a patch while the PS3/console users will have what they need/want from the time they buy the game.  But lets want and see how this develops.  The supposed beta maybe cut short, pc release maybe delayed...who knows.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jan 11, 2010)

I will agree that this game is highly anticipated (by myself also), however I am still upset that the last bf was 2142, which is the first one only one ive ever played.

Developers tend to forget that their best fans, followers, and gamers are on the PC.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 11, 2010)

3870x2 said:


> battlefield 2142 > quake wars.


 2142 couldn't hold a candle to BF2. But thats not why I suggested Quake Wars. The thing is QW uses less people per server and the maps are set up for this. Its more likely to give you the same feel as BC2. Good practice ya know? Get Quake Wars and join me against the Strogg! Earth needs you soldier!



3870x2 said:


> I will agree that this game is highly anticipated (by myself also), however I am still upset that the last bf was 2142, which is the first one only one ive ever played.
> 
> Developers tend to forget that their best fans, followers, and gamers are on the PC.


Dude you owe it to yourself to play BF2. Its SMOKES 2142. Trust me on this.

As for the beta conversation I already stated the obvious and thats developers call demos betas now to avoid being held to anything in the final product. ALSO this beta could be for the first patch and not the initial release. The news of the delay is fake. Ill put money on it.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 11, 2010)

Well that is a matter of opinion.  I liked BF2142 and BF2 for different reasons.  Most people prefer BF2 for the same reason they like CoD4, it is modern warfare.  It provides a better since of being the character in the game because it is something you could have plausible done had you joined the armed forces.  While BF2142 is set in a time frame that puts it well into the realm of "Fantasy", which is a concept I firmly disagree with.

I have personally come to like BF2142 better than BF2 for a few reasons.  It has its flaws, but it has a lot of strengths and character I think gets overlooked.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 11, 2010)

Play Project Reality.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

> The Ammo Box, Medkit, Defibrillator, Repair Tool, and Motion Sensor are now unlocks for each class.
> Players new to Battlefield will be introduced to these teamplay items when they are unlocked.
> Battlefield Veterans will automatically have these teamplay items unlocked from the start.


This is the same kind of crap they tried to pull with BF2142.  That was part of the reason why that game didn't do so well.  Now we have to have someone decipher their definition of what verterans are?  Is it:
-Pre ordering like we did with BF2142.
-Based if you played BC1 
-Based on any Batllefield game
or some other BS?  We also do not yet know how many points it will take to unlock them or in what order they are unlocked.  As it stands though this is for the console. I hope they don't incorporate this in the PC.


----------



## 3870x2 (Jan 11, 2010)

are the bf2 servers still going strong?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

There are still up and you can find a few 64 player servers out there that's been admin pretty good.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

*Update*

You better update your BF veteran status here!


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 11, 2010)

TheLaughingMan said:


> And just as a heads up for anyone thinking of getting the game through the Pre-order, they will ship a copy to you the day of release, so you will not get the game the day it comes out.  You will most likely get it the following week if you pick the free shipping option like I did.
> 
> But considering all the free unlocks, I won't be to far behind my crazy, murderous Brothers-in-Arms.



Thats why I pre-ordered mine of he EA store, get in the beta, get the unlocks, get a digital copy. Win, Win, and more Win.



EastCoasthandle said:


> As for the reasons for the 1 week difference between beta and the game going gold?  Sorry, that don't work.  If they go through as planned the release of BC2 to the community it will be considered an early demo not a open/closed beta.  In which any bug fixes would be patched after the game hits the market.  That is not how a beta program works.



You have to remember, the PS3 game does not have DX11, thats is a massive difference. Not to mention, they had the PS3 beta out almost 2 months ago and it was as bug free as almost any release game. Usually with consoles being more picky they have to submit the final product earlier, I think the final PS3/360 copy has to be submitted by the end of this month (maybe even before the PC beta starts). 

And since the console deadline is more strict thats why the PC beta got pushed back (I believe they even stated that when they pushed back the PC beta). So I would expect a day 1 patch on the PC version no doubt, betas get pushed back and final copies of almost anything now days has to be patched right off the bat. It sucks, but thats how it is, it allows them to go gold, and do minor tweaks while spitting out copies of the game to hit the market faster.



EastCoasthandle said:


> You better update your BF veteran status here!



I wish EA would work on their site more, I was never able to register my copy of BF2. But now I'm really lost, I have 1943 on PS3, and that isn't popping up on my list, but Bad Company is, shouldn't that auto register?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> ...
> You have to remember, the PS3 game does not have DX11, thats is a massive difference. Not to mention, they had the PS3 beta out almost 2 months ago and it was as bug free as almost any release game. Usually with consoles being more picky they have to submit the final product earlier, I think the final PS3/360 copy has to be submitted by the end of this month (maybe even before the PC beta starts).


There should be no divide here.  PC gamers in general are more particular about their games then console.  This alone should hold up a red flag.  The issue isn't about gamers it's about not stepping on the toes of Sony and MS!  They are the consoler gamers advocates.  PC...not so much.




1Kurgan1 said:


> And since the console deadline is more strict thats why the PC beta got pushed back (I believe they even stated that when they pushed back the PC beta). So I would expect a day 1 patch on the PC version no doubt, betas get pushed back and final copies of almost anything now days has to be patched right off the bat. It sucks, but thats how it is, it allows them to go gold, and do minor tweaks while spitting out copies of the game to hit the market faster.
> 
> 
> 
> I wish EA would work on their site more, I was never able to register my copy of BF2. But now I'm really lost, I have 1943 on PS3, and that isn't popping up on my list, but Bad Company is, shouldn't that auto register?


The PC demo/beta release was pushed back because they found so many issues with the PS3 beta (read 130 items in the change log in my other post). This is why I said this is how a proper beta should be done.  It allowed for not only bug fixes but balancing and fine tuning of the game.  So far, PS3 (and possibly 360) owners will get the opportunity to enjoy the game at the time of the purchase.  If they hold true to their original deadline(s) and balancing, bugs and/or fine tuning issues need to be addressed it will either cause a PC delay or release with the expectation of patch.  PC gamers deserve the same consideration when a game is release as the consoles.  

Although the veteran registration is up and running I don't believe it's fully operational.  When that will happen is anyone's guess.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 11, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> There should be no divide here.  PC gamers in general are more particular about their games then console.  This alone should hold up a red flag.  The issue isn't about gamers it's about not stepping on the toes of Sony and MS!  They are the consoler gamers advocates.  PC...not so much.



There should be none, but there is, thats how the world works. To meet deadlines, it's easier to put a game to gold, then allow people to play that month before it releases and find the small bugs to fix, just multitasking.



EastCoasthandle said:


> The PC demo/beta release was pushed back because they found so many issues with the PS3 beta (read 130 items in the change log in my other post). This is why I said this is how a proper beta should be done.  It allowed for not only bug fixes but balancing and fine tuning of the game.  So far, PS3 (and possibly 360) owners will get the opportunity to enjoy the game at the time of the purchase.  If they hold true to their original deadline(s) and balancing, bugs and/or fine tuning issues need to be addressed it will either cause a PC delay or release with the expectation of patch.  PC gamers deserve the same consideration when a game is release as the consoles.



And yes the PC beta was pushed back because issues, but thats exactly what I had said, it was pushed back so they could fine tune the console versions since their deadline to be into Sony and MS was sooner than the PC's version. Ether way, just going off heresay and such isn't the best info. I personally played in the beta, as did 7 of my friends. The amount of bugs any of us ran across can be counted on one had. The bugs plaguing BC 2 on PS3 weren't ground breaking bugs, one comes to mind, that you could use C4 and an Assault Rifle. I've seen games release that were more buggy than that beta, it ran really nice. I still say they won't have an issue releasing it on the deadline dates, but expect a patch on release day, I played the game already and it ran good, if I hadn't and I was reading the doom and gloom news, I might expect something else. I've played in a lot of betas that were far more buggy than this.



EastCoasthandle said:


> Although the veteran registration is up and running I don't believe it's fully operational.  When that will happen is anyone's guess.



Yeah, I tried to add BF2 months ago and it didn't work, I might have to try again. Granted in BC1 there was no reward for anything beyond being a Vet with just 1 previous BF title, so I doubt they will reward people for the more titles they own.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> There should be none, but there is, thats how the world works. To meet deadlines, it's easier to put a game to gold, then allow people to play that month before it releases and find the small bugs to fix, just multitasking.


Actually that is the problem in the nutshell which is why you are debating it.  So saying "that's how the world works" isn't relevant although if nothing more then being passive aggressive.  The truth is the PC portion of this game should be given the same attention as found from other developers. 




1Kurgan1 said:


> And yes the PC beta was pushed back because issues, but thats exactly what I had said, it was pushed back so they could fine tune the console versions since their deadline to be into Sony and MS was sooner than the PC's version. Ether way, just going off heresay and such isn't the best info. I personally played in the beta, as did 7 of my friends. The amount of bugs any of us ran across can be counted on one had. The bugs plaguing BC 2 on PS3 weren't ground breaking bugs, one comes to mind, that you could use C4 and an Assault Rifle. I've seen games release that were more buggy than that beta, it ran really nice. I still say they won't have an issue releasing it on the deadline dates, but expect a patch on release day, I played the game already and it ran good, if I hadn't and I was reading the doom and gloom news, I might expect something else. I've played in a lot of betas that were far more buggy than this.


I think you missed a few things such as balancing and fine tuning.  Bugs are only one portion.  That's how they came up with 130 fixes.  How many of those fixes will actually go into the PC is not really confirmed at this time.  Which is why the PC needs their own beta.  Because what works on the console may not work as intended on the PC, for example.




1Kurgan1 said:


> Yeah, I tried to add BF2 months ago and it didn't work, I might have to try again. Granted in BC1 there was no reward for anything beyond being a Vet with just 1 previous BF title, so I doubt they will reward people for the more titles they own.


Another thing about this veteran status is there appears to be some sort of ranking system.  At this time it is not clear if that has any meaning for BC2 or not.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 11, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Actually that is the problem in the nutshell which is why you are debating it.  So saying "that's how the world works" isn't relevant although if nothing more then being passive aggressive.  The truth is the PC portion of this game should be given the same attention as found from other developers.



The PC portion of the game will have dedicated servers and DX11, look at how aggressive PC gamers were with MW2 and their petition, it did jack crap. Saying thats how the world works is just telling you, that most games now days go gold with issues and patch to them, at least if your a PC gamer thats how it works. The only way I could see someone not understanding this is if they were a heavy console player. With the feature list of whats coming to BC2 on PC compared to the competition, and already having played the game, count me in as happy, you can slice it anyway you want calling it passive aggressive, but I have played the game, and it seems like you haven't and are over reacting.



EastCoasthandle said:


> I think you missed a few things such as balancing and fine tuning.  Bugs are only one portion.  That's how they came up with 130 fixes.  How many of those fixes will actually go into the PC is not really confirmed at this time.  Which is why the PC needs their own beta.  Because what works on the console may not work as intended on the PC, for example.



Not missing that at all, I gave you an example, I wasn't planning to write a book, but I could give you another example, the XM8 Compact was over powered, theres your balancing issue.   
but I do agree PC needs it's own testing, which it has been getting, theres been videos of people playing in a closed beta, this is an Open type beta, they are completely different, and thats where I think you are getting confused. Open betas are usually a demo of the game, closed beta is where most real fine tuning happens, then they want to stress the servers so they test it as an Open beta and bam it's ready to go. As a closed beta they can be more 1 on 1 with their testers and actually get results, where as an open beta not everyone (most people that is) will even look to report bugs, they mostly look to play the game and see if they want to buy it (like a demo). And since thats the nature of people most company's have moved to turning "Open Beta" into a demo pretty much. And that explanation right there solves all your questions. With Open beta just being about 2 weeks away, it's too late to make an announcement, and I can't recall a push back announcement called during an open beta ever. That will be announced during closed beta normally. It looks right on track, I'd be willing to bet a pan full of fresh chocolate chip cookies that these dates are pretty much set in stone right now, and that the games going to be a blast (it was in DX9 consolized, can't wait for DX11).



EastCoasthandle said:


> Another thing about this veteran status is there appears to be some sort of ranking system.  At this time it is not clear if that has any meaning for BC2 or not.



How the Vet system works in BC 1 is the more titles you have, it appears in front of your name on scoreboards. Like if you had 3 other BF titles you would just get a 3 before your name, and get some sort of Vet reward gun, which if like BC 1, 1, 3, or 5 other BF titles would all get you that same reward.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 11, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> The PC portion of the game will have dedicated servers and DX11, look at how aggressive PC gamers were with MW2 and their petition, it did jack crap. Saying thats how the world works is just telling you, that most games now days go gold with issues and patch to them, at least if your a PC gamer thats how it works. The only way I could see someone not understanding this is if they were a heavy console player. With the feature list of whats coming to BC2 on PC compared to the competition, and already having played the game, count me in as happy, you can slice it anyway you want calling it passive aggressive, but I have played the game, and it seems like you haven't and are over reacting.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's clear that the use of DX11 and that Dice's statement to use dedicated servers is only but a few positive strides to that out cry.  The DX11 component wasn't initially in BC2 but another version of their frostbite engine. So, in light of that it did more then what you initially thought.  

There is both closed and open betas.  It is clear that the closed beta didn't reveal as much as the open beta did for the PS3.  

At this time it's not clear if they are doing some sort of tier release system based on your veteran status or not.  Nothing about it has been detailed as of yet.  However, if you can prove yourself to be a veteran should be all that is needed for the unlocks.  But we will see.

In all, we are only going to agree to disagree here.  It's clear to me that the time needed to provide PC players both closed and open beta is disproportionate if they stick with the time frames.  It should not be a train of thought to look at a PC beta as a demo and vice versa.  Making it the only means to enjoy a game before release. As other developers do provide an actual demo of their game to the PC community.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 12, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> This is the same kind of crap they tried to pull with BF2142.  That was part of the reason why that game didn't do so well.  Now we have to have someone decipher their definition of what verterans are?  Is it:
> -Pre ordering like we did with BF2142.
> -Based if you played BC1
> -Based on any Batllefield game
> or some other BS?  We also do not yet know how many points it will take to unlock them or in what order they are unlocked.  As it stands though this is for the console. I hope they don't incorporate this in the PC.



In BF2142, you just had to create your account at EA before the game was released.  They would ask for your BF2 account name and password.  All it did, was put a red 2 in front of your name in the game.  No big deal really.


----------



## troyrae360 (Jan 12, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> You better update your BF veteran status here!



Sweet, Im now a Veteran


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 12, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> There is both closed and open betas.  It is clear that the closed beta didn't reveal as much as the open beta did for the PS3.



Almost every single issue that was found in the PS3 beta was a weapon balancing issue, I can see very little actually bugs on the game. toning up or down weapon damage, greater range of scopes, a few cooldown fixes, a few fixes to make things destroy that are made of metal. Not really any major bugs that were found, and not fixing most of those would still make it a great game, just maybe with some OP or underpowered weapons (which most games end up having).

We'll see though, can't wait for the 28th to make an official judgement on the PC's state of the game instead of sitting here and guessing.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 12, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> Almost every single issue that was found in the PS3 beta was a weapon balancing issue, I can see very little actually bugs on the game. toning up or down weapon damage, greater range of scopes, a few cooldown fixes, a few fixes to make things destroy that are made of metal. Not really any major bugs that were found, and not fixing most of those would still make it a great game, just maybe with some OP or underpowered weapons (which most games end up having).
> 
> We'll see though, can't wait for the 28th to make an official judgement on the PC's state of the game instead of sitting here and guessing.



I agree.  Can't wait for the hands on.  Then I can stop watching these videos and complaining about how bad the snipers are.

I got my Vet status as well.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 14, 2010)

Here's an update from the developers regarding this game:

source


----------



## Kursah (Jan 15, 2010)

That looks more like a thread flaming about situations than what might happen, sure looks to be a chance it will, but I see noone in that thread claiming to be a dev or releasing true dev info, just a guy that seems to have consilidated stuff he's read to his understanding, though with everyone agreeing odds are he has a point or a few of em'. In all honesty, I'm eager to try the beta, I'll see that in action soon enough and go from there.


----------



## shevanel (Jan 15, 2010)

from what the ps3 players have been saying about beta this game should be nothing short of a blast to play and with frostbite being dx11 on PC that even sweetens the gig.

My only concern is that the player movement is semi-realistic crappyness like ARMAII

if so it would ruin it for me because that gives me motion sickness like no other.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

I like the movement, it's fast enough to feel real, and not too slow. Running fast like Source games are just so unreal, we're not a bunch of hyper super human .


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

Kursah said:


> That looks more like a thread flaming about situations than what might happen, sure looks to be a chance it will, but I see noone in that thread claiming to be a dev or releasing true dev info, just a guy that seems to have consilidated stuff he's read to his understanding, though with everyone agreeing odds are he has a point or a few of em'. In all honesty, I'm eager to try the beta, I'll see that in action soon enough and go from there.



Devs there have confirmed the following:
-no prone
-no developer console (recent in another thread)
-software sound PC:5.1/48kHz/16-bit, Console:48kHz/32-bit(recent in another thread)
-they will look into getting some sort of anti cheating program setup for the beta/game but as of now there is none
-no mod tools so that the modding community can't provide us other maps
-etc


----------



## Kursah (Jan 15, 2010)

Meh, not too worried about it till I get to see for myself. The modding is a slight dissapointment, the prone is a bummer, but till I get to actually try the beta I'm not too worried about the claims. Sure some of it sounds like a bummer, but it's tough for me to nitpick the claims or dev claims yet, or even want to at this point. If the game sucks, oh well, move on, if it's awesome, then sweet let's get some people on and get goin'.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/bat...01/07/bfbc2-pc-beta-update-fr-229-n-dice.aspx



> Anti Cheat:  We're going with PunkBuster supporting the same options BF2 and BF2142 had to run unranked without PunkBuster.
> 
> Mod Tools: There will not be mod tools for BFBC2.  However a majority of the the games logic is controlled by the server and there will be Serverside control options for the dedicated servers.
> 
> Public Server Files: We will not distribute these publicly.  There are many factors for why we have decided this with the biggest factor being security & integrity of our game & Dedicated Server



I played the beta for PS3, didn't see the need for prone, it only encourages camping anyway.

Abit down with the "no mod" news, but that doesn't bother me, I didn't like the mod maps anyway. The rest, like no console, I don't really care, didn't even touch it. Hell yeah, I'm a casual player which found BC2 is < MW2.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 15, 2010)

Where does it say no prone?


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

You can't prone in the PS3 beta, only crouching.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 15, 2010)

shevanel said:


> from what the ps3 players have been saying about beta this game should be nothing short of a blast to play and with frostbite being dx11 on PC that even sweetens the gig.
> 
> *My only concern is that the player movement is semi-realistic crappyness like ARMAII*
> 
> if so it would ruin it for me because that gives me motion sickness like no other.



From what I played of the PS3 beta the infantry handle more like COD4 but the player has a little more "oomph" and weight to their movement. After playing the beta COD4 was the only game that gave a similar experience. Hope this helps.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

This is MW2.  Except you can't prone LOL
Oh, almost forgot, you should love the 16bit sound.  You want 32 bit sound?  Get it on the console.


----------



## Kursah (Jan 15, 2010)

So this is the "what if" sort of twilight zone of MW2 with dedicated servers?  Really I could probably live with that, and I'm sure it'll have the buddy list, and stuff we're accustomed to in the BF world that CoD4 was lacking and CoD5 had but in an odd execution of it.

Still not sold on the sound claims, but hey if it sounds good, who really gives a damn but spec whores? If it sounds good to my ears on 16-bit, then cool, if not, I'll definitely letcha know when beta hits. I don't really see why they'd do that in all honesty, almost a back-ass-wards decision if it's a fact imo. Either way, you haven't "unsold" me on it yet, keep going though! You're bringing up some interesting findings.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

Kursah said:


> So this is the "what if" sort of twilight zone of MW2 with dedicated servers?  Really I could probably live with that, and I'm sure it'll have the buddy list, and stuff we're accustomed to in the BF world that CoD4 was lacking and CoD5 had but in an odd execution of it.
> 
> Still not sold on the sound claims, but hey if it sounds good, who really gives a damn but spec whores? If it sounds good to my ears on 16-bit, then cool, if not, I'll definitely letcha know when beta hits. I don't really see why they'd do that in all honesty, almost a back-ass-wards decision if it's a fact imo. Either way, you haven't "unsold" me on it yet, keep going though! You're bringing up some interesting findings.



They did it because they need at least 1 hardware thread to run the sound from you CPU (from what was explained by a developer).  There is no hardware acceleration (OpenAL, EAX, etc).  There is most certainly a difference between 16bit audio and 32bit audio.  However, if all you hear is 16bit you won't know how much better it would sound in 32bit unless you compare.  Here's the kicker, your PC speakers maybe a tad bit better then your HDTV's speakers.  So if you compare the 2 I suggest using a receiver for both.


----------



## Marineborn (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> This is MW2.  Except you can't prone LOL
> Oh, almost forgot, you should love the 16bit sound.  You want 32 bit sound?  Get it on the console.



yeah the only diffrence is mw2 is garbage, you cant destroy whole buildings in mw2, you cant drive tanks in mw2, you have no dedicated servers in mw2, mw2 is just a exspanions of mw1, mw2 graphics are dated and old and sickening, Yepyour right its just like mw2! dam i must be blind! hahahahahaha


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> This is MW2.  Except you can't prone LOL
> Oh, almost forgot, you should love the 16bit sound.  You want 32 bit sound?  Get it on the console.



What Marine said, any FPS worth its salt now I feel should have destructible buildings. To make your own doorways or take away sniper hiding spots, with todays technology, that is a must.


----------



## Rapidfire48 (Jan 15, 2010)

This is far better than MW2. I played the beta and you have to actually shoot your opponent in vital areas. MW2 if you shoot his toes he will die. You cannot run 60 mph in this game and there are no care packages. It has many more options and the sound quality is good and might I add dedicated servers .This game will thump MW2 easily in game play and graphics. 
MW2= COD4 on roids and with a lot less options.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 15, 2010)

Meh. Some of these things suck if they are true but none of these are a deal breaker yet.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 15, 2010)

I'm not an audiophile but I do have some high(ish)end gear to listen to when gaming. If the PC version sounds even "just as good" as the PS3 beta I'll be happy. Hearing the distinct metal on metal sound when reloading the RPG sold me on the sound quality in this game. When you hear it you'll shit bricks*. 

*_Assuming you have the right equipment. _


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

Marineborn said:


> yeah the only diffrence is mw2 is garbage, you cant destroy whole buildings in mw2, you cant drive tanks in mw2, you have no dedicated servers in mw2, mw2 is just a exspanions of mw1, mw2 graphics are dated and old and sickening, Yepyour right its just like mw2! dam i must be blind! hahahahahaha


Yes, you are because having over 100K online apparently those "what you want" features are not stopping everyone else from play MW2.  Stop  being so self absorbed  




1Kurgan1 said:


> What Marine said, any FPS worth its salt now I feel should have destructible buildings. To make your own doorways or take away sniper hiding spots, with todays technology, that is a must.


Destructible buildings are not the end all be all of a FPS.





Rapidfire48 said:


> This is far better than MW2. I played the beta and you have to actually shoot your opponent in vital areas. MW2 if you shoot his toes he will die. You cannot run 60 mph in this game and there are no care packages. It has many more options and the sound quality is good and might I add dedicated servers .This game will thump MW2 easily in game play and graphics.
> MW2= COD4 on roids and with a lot less options.


Thats HC mode.  Oh did I mention that BC2 will have their own HC mode, LOL!  Please be reminded that BC2 is not an exact replica of MW2.  But it's apparent they are mimicking it.  And, the sound quality will be better on the console unless it is changed.

Some of these post are down right funny, I have been amused


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 15, 2010)

Roll on the 26th!


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Destructible buildings are not the end all be all of a FPS.



Having played the PS3 beta I have to disagree with this statement. Playing a tactical shooter with a dynamic and changing environment is an awesome and fresh experience in a genre which more or less has been the same since as long as I can remember. It's the "be all and end all" for me now.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 15, 2010)

I've been waiting for destructible terrain for ages, can't f'ing wait!


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 15, 2010)

InnocentCriminal said:


> I've been waiting for destructible terrain for ages, can't f'ing wait!



this. 

I had always thought it would rock.. and it does. DICE did it well enough on a crappy console to make me happy. Can only imagine how awesome it will be on PC. 11 days and counting till we get keys


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 15, 2010)

Yeeeeeah!


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

TRIPTEX_MTL said:


> Having played the PS3 beta I have to disagree with this statement. Playing a tactical shooter with a dynamic and changing environment is an awesome and fresh experience in a genre which more or less has been the same since as long as I can remember. It's the "be all and end all" for me now.



We will agree to disagree but the truth remains that destructible environments don't make the game.  No different then any other physics effects.  It's only an addition to it regardless if you played the beta or not.  That portion isn't relevant.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

Er no, collapse building do kill people and destroy crates, so it's a very importance part of the game, a strategy. Putting holes on building create shooting path and expose hidden enemies too.

Damn, seriously, just wait and play the beta/demo.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> We will agree to disagree but the truth remains that destructible environments don't make the game.  No different then any other physics effects.  It's only an addition to it regardless if you played the beta or not.  That portion isn't relevant.



I think it is an important feature for the game though, it's one of the features I'm looking forward to the most, even if it is a novelty it's going to be a very welcome addition. Could make or break the game for some - pun is accidental.


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> This is MW2.  Except you can't prone LOL
> Oh, almost forgot, you should love the 16bit sound.  You want 32 bit sound?  Get it on the console.



theres nothing wrong with 16bit audio... all music CD's you buy at the shop and download are 16bit 44.1khz... also on the types of speaker systems that you game on (5.1 surround systems and pc speakers) youll be hard pressed to notice difference between 16bit & 24bit audio playback if any


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> theres nothing wrong with 16bit audio... all music CD's you buy at the shop and download are 16bit 44.1khz... also on the types of speaker systems that you game on (5.1 surround systems and pc speakers) youll be hard pressed to notice difference between 16bit & 24bit audio playback if any



This is very wrong.  I haven't seen a 16 bit audio game since the Intel 386 CPU days.  For the most part 24bit sound has been the norm.  Using 16bit sound is actually going backwards.  Remember, we are talking about games not cd's .  If you want to do a real comparison it's the difference between a cd and HD audio.  
It' funny what people are willing to settle for because they don't know better.  

Edit: Since you brought up the subject here is a decent explanation of Bit Depth (16bit vs 24 bit)


> Bit Depth refers to the number of bits you have to capture audio.  The easiest way to envision this is as a series of levels, that audio energy can be sliced at any given moment in time.  With 16 bit audio, there are 65,536 possible levels.  With every bit of greater resolution, the number of levels double.  By the time we get to 24 bit, we actually have 16,777,216 levels.  Remember we are talking about a slice of audio frozen in a single moment of time...
> 
> 1. Recording at 24/96 yields greatly increased audio resolution-over 250 times that at 16/44.1
> 
> 2. Recording at 24/96 takes up roughly 3 1/4 times the space than recording at 16/44.1




A bit depth of 16 usually only allows us a sample rate of 48Hz.  While a bit depth of 24 allows for up to 96Hz-192Hz.  As you can see 16/48Hz is not OK.  Not by a long shot is it ok.  Even in win7 it should be set to at least 24bit which they consider it to be "Studio Quality".



> Its not that 24 bits of data makes the sound better.  It actually does not.  What is does is give your audio more room to breathe in the numeric realm of digital audio.  Remember, we are talking about numbers, calculations, not analog waveforms.  With 24 bits of data demarcing your recording medium, its is possible to record extremely dynamic music, with very quiet soft passages and extraordinary loud passages.


This is the advantage right here.  It's not that 24 bit audio would just sound better.  The difference are pretty small. The main advantage is that it allows you to hear the dynamic ranges of sounds much better.  In BC2 it's the difference between foot steps to hearing someone talking off in the distance.  Then there are those explosions, gun fire and tanks firing, etc that gives 24bit the distant advantage within their dynamic range.  It's just those sounds alone individually but in combination where 24bit truly shines over 16 bit.  Those are the audio ques we've come to expect out of a Battlefield game.


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> This is very wrong. If you want to do a real comparison it's the difference between a cd and HD audio.
> It' funny what people are willing to settle for because they don't know better.




Im a producer and studio engineer and have been making music and working with audio for the last 15 years... i think i am quite informed in this area to be honest 

When working with and producing audio youll work in 24bit 48khz/96khz/192khz if you can but essentially its mastered at 44.1khz 16bit so that it can be made commercially available on CD and for retail.

24bit audio will obviously sound better on top end audiophile and high end studio speakers but not on most consumer brand speakers for home and home theatre use... and we are talking about a video game here which means that the playback will most likely be on someone TV 5.1 system or PC speakers with little to no chance of the user being able to differentiate between 16bit / 24bit audio on their speaker setups

Nothing wrong with 16bit audio, sounds just as good essentially and more importantly uses less CPU overhead and HDD space which when making a game for PC is an important consideration in my books


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> Im a producer and studio engineer and have been making music and working with audio for the last 15 years... i think i am quite informed in this area to be honest
> 
> When working with and producing audio youll work in 24bit 48khz/96khz/192khz if you can but essentially its mastered at 44.1khz 16bit so that it can be made commercially available on CD and for retail.
> 
> ...


Read my edited post above. There it's clear why you are wrong and why you have to look at this more subjectively for gaming and not just for music/TV, etc.


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

Yes of course the technology is better, but does it make a difference in most cases?

ok well for starters there arent any consumer 5.1 PC soundcards that ive seen that output 32bit digital audio... so far its up to 24bit 192khz.... and even then most of them wont do 192khz over all 5.1 channels

Secondly if you had a crap recording and played it over 16bit setup first and the a 24bit setup, its not going to sound any better just becuase the resolution of the medium was higher.... its still a crap recording. having said this just becuase something is 24bit dosent automatically mean it sounds any better, its all about the source recording.

if the original source recording was 24bit audio and it was then rendered down to 16bit, its going to lose some definition but whether or not the human ear is able to distinguish this over the majority of speaker systems out there is very questionable or whether the speakers used can actually reach those extra frequencies and whether they are in the band of human hearing.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> Yes of course the technology is better, but does it make a difference in most cases?
> 
> ok well for starters there arent any consumer 5.1 PC soundcards that ive seen that output 32bit digital audio... so far its up to 24bit 192khz.... and even then most of them wont do 192khz over all 5.1 channels
> 
> ...


We are not discussing most cases and for the most part games use 24bit, we know that!  We are discussing BC2 and the dynamic range of audio this game is designed to offer.  This is why 24bit/32bit is better then 16bit for the game regarding it's dynamic range of audio cues.  And, why so many PS3'rs are so pleased with the audio cues that the game provided.  Because it was done so at a much higher bit depth!  

This is why I said that if you want to do a comparison when the PC beta and console demo come out use the same receiver (a decent one preferably) and you will notice the difference. Oh and I almost forgot, they could indeed offer a 32bit depth for this game because they are offering it via software.  It would simply need to be an option based on what kind of CPU you have but it's do-able.  Heck, that can be done on OpenAL.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

Windows 7's default for music is 16bit

And I have been listening to music and movies at 16 bit, and it's fine. At least for me.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> Windows 7's default for music is 16bit
> 
> And I have been listening to music and movies at 16 bit, and it's fine. At least for me.



Windows 7 default music is set for 24/44 for me.  Which is why I posted it.


----------



## johnnyfiive (Jan 15, 2010)

Take that audio battle to PMSG's, wheres my BF BC2 !!!?!!!


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

the technology is better yes, thats not what im saying... I also diddnt post this to try and prove a point and say that you are wrong.

I did it becuase people pay too much attention to specs of things.... thinking that they automatically must be better because its higher specced when its not always the case with the end product.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

Anything uses 24bit is studio quality according to Microsoft, why home user need studio quality? We're not exactly doing any mixing or editing here, and I could not notice a noticeable different.

It's seem like 24 bit have more echo, but that's it. Sounds in war game are all messy and overlapped each other. It's not classical music, come on stop making a big fuss over such small thing, and wait for the beta.


----------



## boise49ers (Jan 15, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> theres nothing wrong with 16bit audio... all music CD's you buy at the shop and download are 16bit 44.1khz... also on the types of speaker systems that you game on (5.1 surround systems and pc speakers) youll be hard pressed to notice difference between 16bit & 24bit audio playback if any


I disagree. The sound on Modern Warfare World at War 
was horrible if you didn't have it set to 24 bit. If this 
is the same I'm gonna be pissed. I love having great sound. 
Try Crysis at 16 bit then switch to 24 bit. If you don't run a 
good sound card and 5.1 then no need to worry I suppose.
Couldn't this be addressed thru a patch at some point. Why
would they do that to the PC version ? Sounds fishy !


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

boise49ers said:


> I disagree. The sound on Modern Warfare World at War
> was horrible if you didn't have it set to 24 bit. If this
> is the same I'm gonna be pissed. I love having great sound.
> Try Crysis at 16 bit then switch to 24 bit. If you don't run a
> ...



I'm finally glad someone knows this isn't good in practice.  If you don't agree then try any game that offers the option and see for yourself.  Perhaps it's true it may not be 100% replica of how BC2 is developed it should give you some idea of what you are missing vs what the console actually uses.  Perhaps some just don't care.  As long as there is some sort of sound it's good enough.  In that case this debate isn't for you.


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

its more of a case of how the the audio engine is mixing the signals rather than making up for bad mixing by having a higher resolution format to prevent clipping...


----------



## Marineborn (Jan 15, 2010)

lol east, do you work for Infinityward, your are trying to bash this game and say how horrible it is at evert turn, when any blind person can see it blows the pants off lame ass 60 exspanion packs. EX. MW2


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 15, 2010)

> The current fashion in digital audio right now is "bit depth". As has been the standard practice for decades, audio is being sold by the numbers, whether meaningful or meaningless. And of course, everybody involved in digital audio transfer is now shouting about their bit depth. 16-bit? 24-bit? 32-bit? Hey, why not 64-bit while they're at it? Logic would suggest that the greater the bit depth, the better the sound. Accordingly, LP to CD transfer companies always point out their 24-bit process to make you think their transfers will sound better. But is there a genuine advantage to higher bit-depth transfers?
> 
> To answer that question, let's look at how bit depth relates to digital audio. The function of bit depth is to determine dynamic range. A greater bit-depth gives you more potential numbers between the zero-crossing point of the waveform and the peak, thus greater amplitude is possible. Or, to put it another way, a greater differential between the peak level and the noise floor. 24-bit might be, theoretically, quieter than 16 bit (which is already dead quiet). The popular way of thinking is that 24-bit has "higher resolution" than 16-bit, but this is fallacy. Resolution is determined by sampling frequency, not bit depth. To illustrate, picture 44,100 orange crates standing in a row. Those crates represent one second of CD audio. Bit depth measures the size of those orange crates. A 16-bit crate can hold 65,535 oranges, and a 24-bit crate can hold 16,777,216 oranges. Thing is, even if they held a TRILLION oranges, there's only ever going to be 44,100 of them. The resolution remains unchanged.
> 
> ...



http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f46/24bit-vs-16bit-how-big-difference-280217/index49.html


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 15, 2010)

Good read kid.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 15, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I'm finally glad someone knows this isn't good in practice.  If you don't agree then try any game that offers the option and see for yourself.  Perhaps it's true it may not be 100% replica of how BC2 is developed it should give you some idea of what you are missing vs what the console actually uses.  Perhaps some just don't care.  As long as there is some sort of sound it's good enough.  In that case this debate isn't for you.


 East I know where your coming from with this and I agree. Anything less than the console is BS. Its the principle. Im with ya there.

However I think the point people are trying to make is the difference between 16 and 24 bit isn't going to effect most people. Why? Think of it this way. Sound is fuel. The better the fuel (bit-rate) the better the performance (sound). But who cares about the quality of the fuel or performance if your driving a tractor! See my point? Most people dont have the equipment to even tell the difference between the two.

Now my issue is you cant lay prone! I mean WTF how is Erocker going to accept my love standing up?!


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

It may have been covered in the post already im not sure, but I think the prone issue is becuase the terrain is destructable... you can literally blow holes in the ground and apparently the maps change depending on what explosions and gunfire take place.... I think with this type of terrain it is too difficult for them to be able to code the prone position and have it work well in the game at the same time.... all other games where you go prone etc, the ground is static and dosent change


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 15, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> It may have been covered in the post already im not sure, but I think the prone issue is becuase the terrain is destructable... you can literally blow holes in the ground and apparently the maps change depending on what explosions and gunfire take place.... I think with this type of terrain it is too difficult for them to be able to code the prone position and have it work well in the game at the same time.... all other games where you go prone etc, the ground is static and dosent change



That would make sense.


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 15, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Now my issue is you cant lay prone! I mean WTF how is Erocker going to accept my love standing up?!


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 15, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> It may have been covered in the post already im not sure, but I think the prone issue is becuase the terrain is destructable... you can literally blow holes in the ground and apparently the maps change depending on what explosions and gunfire take place.... I think with this type of terrain it is too difficult for them to be able to code the prone position and have it work well in the game at the same time.... all other games where you go prone etc, the ground is static and dosent change



I so hope that is true, I don't think BC2 will be completely destructible but if it is, I'll shed a tear maybe more depending on how it performs.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 15, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> East I know where your coming from with this and I agree. Anything less than the console is BS. Its the principle. Im with ya there.
> 
> However I think the point people are trying to make is the difference between 16 and 24 bit isn't going to effect most people. Why? Think of it this way. Sound is fuel. The better the fuel (bit-rate) the better the performance (sound). But who cares about the quality of the fuel or performance if your driving a tractor! See my point? Most people dont have the equipment to even tell the difference between the two.
> 
> Now my issue is you cant lay prone! I mean WTF how is Erocker going to accept my love standing up?!



LOL, 
I'm not trying to convince anyone to buy or not to buy the game.  But as you pointed out we should at least have the same sound quality as the console.  For those who don't care again, this debate isn't for you.  But for those of us who took notice of this can and will voice our opinions about it.  kid41212003, as for your quoted post it's an interesting read but really doesn't relate to BC2.  It more relates to recording, dubbing, etc.  Again, in BC2 the dynamic range has already been developed to work best using 32bit which is found in the console. 
----------------------------------
separate post
----------------------------------

In essence I've provided unbiased up to date information regarding this game.  Some of the information is not positive.  It doesn't mean that those who read my response to this negative information should take it personal.  In all it's just a game .


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 15, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> East I know where your coming from with this and I agree. Anything less than the console is BS. Its the principle. Im with ya there.
> 
> However I think the point people are trying to make is the difference between 16 and 24 bit isn't going to effect most people. Why? Think of it this way. Sound is fuel. The better the fuel (bit-rate) the better the performance (sound). But who cares about the quality of the fuel or performance if your driving a tractor! See my point? Most people dont have the equipment to even tell the difference between the two.
> 
> Now my issue is you cant lay prone! I mean WTF how is Erocker going to accept my love standing up?!



The prone isn't actually a big deal, you can crouch, and almost anything that you can take cover behind you fit behind when crouching. If you really want to give erocker your love it's going to have to be orally, with you crouch on his corpses face.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 15, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> The prone isn't actually a big deal, you can crouch, and almost anything that you can take cover behind you fit behind when crouching. If you really want to give erocker your love it's going to have to be orally, with you crouch on his corpses face.



For sniping prone is a must.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 16, 2010)

You can take cover quite well in BC2 by using available shrubbery. With that said I too prefer to snipe prone and generally use it to stay hidden when needed. You will get used to not having it...eventually.


----------



## shevanel (Jan 16, 2010)

at least the snipers will be slightly easier to extinguish...


----------



## scope54 (Jan 16, 2010)

I can't seem to justify why everyone is getting bent out of shape over this game and missing features that were never promised. This is a sequel to a game that started on the console that they are now bringing to the PC. A new subset to the Battlefield franchise. Now if they castrate Battlefield 3 then I'll grab my pitchfork and journey to DICE HQ, WHY? Because Battlefield 1942, Vietnam, BF2, 2142 were all on the PC and I expect more and/or the same features that were in those games. 

Question: Why does DICE have to spend extra dev time to implement BattleRecorder, mod tools, a console etc... for a game that started on consoles (where those features never existed in the first place)?

I do agree about the 16bit sound thing though...that should just be an Audio options thing...and if 32bit sound doesnt work for people...to bad for them.
The server files: I dont know anything about this or how they plan on making servers customizable...basically i dont have an opinion on this.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 16, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> For sniping prone is a must.



My opinion is snipers are a bunch of bitches that can't stand the ground pound and dieing now and then, so they run into the hills and hide like a bitch. Prone being gone doesn't really change that since the maps are quite large, but at least they have a little bit more area to hit. I'm glad prones gone. What makes me really laugh is when a bunch of snipers end up on a team, and they have no ground pounders to cap flags or drop crates, so they just loose since they are all too pussy to move in and actually fight. 

Sorry just had to get that rant out there, either way, theres a bunch of rocks and trees to hide from in the hills if you feel like running out there. Prone missing just really isn't an issue.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 16, 2010)

Don't forget we're [going to be] playing a beta, it could be added in at a later date.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 16, 2010)

I honestly highly doubt it will be, there really is not use for it, they have provided plenty cover for people, even snipers who want scared of death at the edges of the map (and oh they will hide and try and lob bullets in from miles, I've seen some pretty pathetic attempts during the beta).

Also just to let people know, you can kill people by shooting them in the ankles, but it takes a lot. But numerous times I would blow peoples ankles off with the M60 as I seen their little feet underneath a train or, cutting them down at the feet when they are behind a turret. But I was also using an M60, a smaller gun would be even more difficult.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 16, 2010)




----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 16, 2010)

It doesn't bother me if prone is in the game or not, I just hope people are unable to 'bunny hop' that really grinds my gears.


----------



## Marineborn (Jan 16, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/100115/01finished.jpg http://img.techpowerup.org/100115/02finished.jpg



LMAO!!! WOOKIES!!!


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 16, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/100115/01finished.jpg http://img.techpowerup.org/100115/02finished.jpg



I'm not sure if that was known by others, but that is actually the PS3 beta map, and snipers hid on that damn hill, got so many dogtags from them up there, they never look behind them since they dont expect to be killed.


----------



## shevanel (Jan 16, 2010)

*1700*

lol everytime i see kurgan talk about a video game i always drift off thinking how he seems to become the character he plays in the games.just like hes telling old war stories to the kiddos or something.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 16, 2010)

I enjoy sniping for other snipers to be honest. I could care less about flags being capped or any of that unless I'm on a good team. Hunting for snipers with a high powered rifle is relaxing.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 16, 2010)

If prone isn't in BC2 then it'll most likely be in BF3. Only 10 days until I get my beta key!


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 16, 2010)

InnocentCriminal said:


> If prone isn't in BC2 then it'll most likely be in BF3. Only 10 days until I get my beta key!



The best thing about BC2 coming out is we will finally get to hear some news on BF3!


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 16, 2010)

I dunno, the best thing about BC2 coming out [on the PC, with dedicated servers] is that I don't have to put up with all the BS in CoD 4 and other stupid f'ing games.

I get to put up with new BS.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 16, 2010)

I played sniper at first, maxed out and got the M95 (1 hit UV), and then I switched to Medic. I enjoyed playing medic alot more. I got alot more kills per round 'cause i'm always engaging enemies, and M60 is just soooo amazing to use.

Snipers are more useful when your team is defending the base.

Ironsight + marksmen bullet FTW!


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 16, 2010)

shevanel said:


> *1700*
> 
> lol everytime i see kurgan talk about a video game i always drift off thinking how he seems to become the character he plays in the games.just like hes telling old war stories to the kiddos or something.



lol shev, that is going right in my sig! But it's pretty much dead on, you can just think of me heading up that hill one pissed off medic, M60 in hand, knife in mouth, thoughts running through head of sniper bitches dog tags.



TheMailMan78 said:


> I enjoy sniping for other snipers to be honest. I could care less about flags being capped or any of that unless I'm on a good team. Hunting for snipers with a high powered rifle is relaxing.



See now thats what I'm talking about, sometimes you have to resort to beating them at their own game. But when it comes down to that, they always have that far out tactical advantage since you decided to try to snipe the sniper your probably right in the muck, getting shot at and trying to run and pop their head off. And when you do, thats satisfaction.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 16, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> See now thats what I'm talking about, sometimes you have to resort to beating them at their own game. But when it comes down to that, they always have that far out tactical advantage since you decided to try to snipe the sniper your probably right in the muck, getting shot at and trying to run and pop their head off. And when you do, thats satisfaction.



I am actually very, very good at doing that exactly that in 2142.  On a really good day playing defense, I have up to 5 snipers on the other team solely dedicated to finding and killing me.  Which is good because it keeps them from realizing they are losing the game. On a average day, I seem to attract a lot of random bullshit.

I look forward to the beta and hearing the oh so familiar phrases like "How did you get this far behind the front lines", "How did you survive that", and "OMG, WTF killed me! I am not spawning on you while you are there."


----------



## DrunkenMafia (Jan 16, 2010)

I wonder what the sniping will be like, I don't mind laying in the bushes sometimes, especially when I have a wild turkey in 1 hand.  In BF2 it didn't matter how well you hid you still stood out like dogs balls.

Anyone know if you can actually hide in bad company 2.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 16, 2010)

Screw hiding, I want to be at the front lines!


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 16, 2010)

DrunkenMafia said:


> I wonder what the sniping will be like, I don't mind laying in the bushes sometimes, especially when I have a wild turkey in 1 hand.  In BF2 it didn't matter how well you hid you still stood out like dogs balls.
> 
> Anyone know if you can actually hide in bad company 2.



Yes. I cannot be sure, but from what I understand it is a lot like Call of Duty 4.  Your name will not appear on you for the enemy unless they fire what the game considers directly at you.  So if you are hiding, the game will not just out you because they looked in your general area for more than 2 seconds.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 17, 2010)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Yes. I cannot be sure, but from what I understand it is a lot like Call of Duty 4.  Your name will not appear on you for the enemy unless they fire what the game considers directly at you.  So if you are hiding, the game will not just out you because they looked in your general area for more than 2 seconds.



Well thats how most war games work, thats how BC 1 worked. If you spot someone normally their name will remain over their head for a bit, you can also mark that target if you put your crosshairs on it and push a certain button (select on PS3) once thats done your squad can see that targets name for a while. Also gunfire and other random noises will make them appear on your minimap. No stupid relying on kill streak perks to out the other teams like UAV and crap. You make a sound, be prepared to deal with whose coming, plain and simple.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 17, 2010)

This game needs to come out already.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 17, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> This game needs to come out already.



I know I been playing BF 1943 a lot more than I planned too, need BC2.....


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 17, 2010)

That hasn't come out on the PC yet either has it?


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 17, 2010)

Nope, it keeps getting pushed back, was suppose to be this month, but with BC2 beta coming up probably not, maybe Feb, slated for Q1 though. Its a good game for $10 on PSN, but once BC2 is out, won't be much of a point in getting it.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 17, 2010)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kO15qAJmho

This is how well sniper can hide in BC2, btw I made this vid.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Jan 17, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> Well thats how most war games work, thats how BC 1 worked. If you spot someone normally their name will remain over their head for a bit, you can also mark that target if you put your crosshairs on it and push a certain button (select on PS3) once thats done your squad can see that targets name for a while. Also gunfire and other random noises will make them appear on your minimap. No stupid relying on kill streak perks to out the other teams like UAV and crap. You make a sound, be prepared to deal with whose coming, plain and simple.



Didn't play BC1.  Battlefield 2 and BF2142 made it very hard to be a sniper because hiding was not an option.  You were lucky if you could find a few nice positions, but hiding while targeting was out of the question.  In general, if you could see them, they can see you.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 17, 2010)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Didn't play BC1.  Battlefield 2 and BF2142 made it very hard to be a sniper because hiding was not an option.  You were lucky if you could find a few nice positions, but hiding while targeting was out of the question.  In general, if you could see them, they can see you.



Never played 2142, but I know what you mean for BF2, that was because stupid ass scaling maps, thats part of the reason I never liked that game. I was use to roaming the deserts in 1942 DC mod in my M1A1. Glad to say, no player amount scaling maps here, so it's got close quarters areas, and areas for snipers, all in one map. BC1 was a great game, never came to PC so so many people just discounted it and said COD4 was better, I was one of them, having bought COD4 for PC asap. But after playing BC1, I never went back to COD4.


----------



## CDdude55 (Jan 17, 2010)

There's no Console in the PC version of BF:BC2:



> No console for PC version of Bad Company 2
> 
> By James Cottee - Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:27pm
> 
> ...


----------



## EchoMan (Jan 17, 2010)

This will get interesting...

So if there won't be a place for code or commands what is going to be the point of dedicated servers?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 17, 2010)

Indeed.  One thing I enjoy doing is telling PB to go to sleep as it can induce odd stuttering at times.  This has nearly limited that.  If you recall it's 
pb_sleep 500
pb_writecfg

If they are continuing to use PB then that's a genuine concern if you use the feature and notice an marked improvement.  Heck, I've used it in BF2, COD4 and CODWAW.  Funny thing is that this was something told by the community from one of PB's help tickets a good while back.


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 17, 2010)

I fucking hate Punk Buster with every inch of my being. There is now a new issue when playing PB enabled games on Steam that you have to disable the Steam overlay or you'll get booted for having a disallowed program driver.

PB, I hate you!


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 17, 2010)

It's easy, they just can make inside-game-steam-interface to handle Punkbuster.

Press F something and it pops up for you to change settings, like's steam, or games for windows live.

I used to use the console to call bots, change games settings for CSS, but that's like YEARS ago, I haven't touch consoles in any recent games, I think like 5 years +.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 18, 2010)

Just voted on a poll on the BC2 page, and here is exactly where my sniper bitch frustrations come from...







Pretty freaking sad, can't wait a game when you have no physical people to stop the other team, a few snipers help, but I ran across rounds where half of my damn team was hiding in the hills like a bunch of wookies.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Jan 18, 2010)

InnocentCriminal said:


> I fucking hate Punk Buster with every inch of my being. There is now a new issue when playing PB enabled games on Steam that you have to disable the Steam overlay or you'll get booted for having a disallowed program driver.
> 
> PB, I hate you!



you need to contact Punkbuster and Steam over this issue and then tell them to contact eachother since ur having compatibility issues.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 18, 2010)

1Kurgan1 said:


> Just voted on a poll on the BC2 page, and here is exactly where my sniper bitch frustrations come from...
> 
> http://img.techpowerup.org/100117/Capture006.jpg
> 
> Pretty freaking sad, can't wait a game when you have no physical people to stop the other team, a few snipers help, but I ran across rounds where half of my damn team was hiding in the hills like a bunch of wookies.



It's going to be 16 vs 16 for PC, so half can be snipers .


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 18, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> It's going to be 16 vs 16 for PC, so half can be snipers .



Was 16 v 16 on PS3, half as snipers is way too much. You have very little offense with that setup, especially on crates where people need to get there to set charges. It might be enough if the other people are medics, but thats half as popular as recon, so your ground pounders just get murdered since there is no one to revive them and there are so few of them. Then your offense gets pushed back to it's spawn point ,the snipers run way way back into the hills and try and lob in bullets (since bullets drop in this game). Experienced that a few times on PS3 beta, was very painful, me as a medic, I need corpses to bring back, snipers do me no good.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 18, 2010)

I thought it was 8 vs 8 on PS3, guess I didn't notice that... Yeah I were joking about that, but that will be expected in the first few days of the game, until they notice close-combat is more fun .


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

The issue I've seen so far is that you are always exposed.  That's why snipers are so popular as people can clearly see the advantages of being camping, crouching sniper, hidden wookie .  Unless you can find a wall to hide behind you will be re spawning soon.  Many sniper videos clearly show this advantage for snipers.  If one could go prone they could at least get out of line of sight from long range sniping.  Even it it's nothing more then a low lying shrub it's something that can confuse the sniper.  But as it is now with only crouching you are a sitting duck with a sniper with some experience.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 18, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> I thought it was 8 vs 8 on PS3, guess I didn't notice that... Yeah I were joking about that, but that will be expected in the first few days of the game, until they notice close-combat is more fun .



Maybe it was 12 v 12, for sure was 8 v 8 BC1 is 12 v 12 and so is 1943. But I don't really expect that to change, I have noticed as time moves on, the more snipers there are in games, in older FPS's it seemed rare, but now, it just seems everyone is too scared to die, so they would rather stay in the back. I agree close combat is where it's at, I die more, but I kill more, and I actually get objectives done.



EastCoasthandle said:


> The issue I've seen so far is that you are always exposed.  That's why snipers are so popular as people can clearly see the advantages of being camping, crouching sniper, hidden wookie .  Unless you can find a wall to hide behind you will be re spawning soon.  Many sniper videos clearly show this advantage for snipers.  If one could go prone they could at least get out of line of sight from long range sniping.  Even it it's nothing more then a low lying shrub it's something that can confuse the sniper.  But as it is now with only crouching you are a sitting duck with a sniper with some experience.



Nah, theres a lot of cover, but there are specific areas where snipers have much better vantage points of coarse. The distances I watch some snipers in the PS3 beta go is just ridiculous, you would have had to seen it for me to really explain. But one guy must have been getting killed in the good spots up front, and I am running around I hear a bullet whiz past me, I look around confused, he eventually got me as I shouldn't have stood still. But death cam shows him, he is back behind the 1st spawn point, for a rough estimate, I would say he is easily about a mile out from the objectives that his teams going for. So I take the sniper rifle and start shooting at him. He was so far out, to even get my bullets to land by him I had to aim up at a 45 degree angle above him, then watch them do a massive arc. Which means thats all he had been doing, is aiming at the sky and lobbing in bullets like a arc when throwing a football. Was pretty sad. But about cover, most cover is easy to hide behind from a sniper, they can mark you hiding in a bush and kill you, you maybe camo'd but if you got a big triangle on you they marked you with, that doesn't do a ton of good. Any walls crates are big enough to crouch behind, some of them they could maybe pick off your head, but most things are meant to be crouched behind. 

The only reason you could be considered a sitting duck is snipers now have mortar strike, which hits insanely hard, so if you stay behind cover for too long in the same spot, expect that to be called in you.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 18, 2010)

Snipers can be annoy at time, but I don't see them as a threat, I have yet to see anyone who killed me while i'm on the run, exposed or not.

2 body hit for any non-automatic is not easy, especially at long range, 'cause just like Kurgan mentioned, the bullet drop according to shooting distance.

Medic is more a threat, I hate a squad with 4 medics that keep reviving each other...


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

Thankfully, your not the only one playing the game .


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 18, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Thankfully, your not the only one playing the game .



OOOOO, spill the beans! (or maybe I'm reading too much into this?)


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

shsssh  Lets wait for the beta.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 18, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> shssshhh  Lets wait for the beta.



 I demand spilling of beans, if there are any said beans!


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

Nah, it's not like that.  I 'm simple going to get the demo on the console when it comes out in Feb.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 18, 2010)

I pre-ordered at Gamestop (PC Version), but I choose the pick-up option, so I don't have the beta key for PC. I don't want them to ship it to my address, probably take too long =/. I hope there will be another way to get the beta key.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

So far (according to hackslash) this is a closed beta.  Someone else said that places like gamespot will give you the actual beta game along with key.  I can't confirm if that's true though.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 18, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Nah, it's not like that.  I 'm simple going to get the demo on the console when it comes out in Feb.



Ah, was hoping for juicy morsels of info  You not going to be playing it on PC? And you sure thye will be having a demo for consoles? I suppose they might as well as the console version of the game goes gold in like a week.



kid41212003 said:


> I pre-ordered at Gamestop (PC Version), but I choose the pick-up option, so I don't have the beta key for PC. I don't want them to ship it to my address, probably take too long =/. I hope there will be another way to get the beta key.



You should have just pre-ordered it as a digital copy through the EA store, that was about the only way I could figure that you could be in the beta (for sure and not waiting for websites to give a chance at keys) and also be able to play on day 1.



EastCoasthandle said:


> So far (according to hackslash) this is a closed beta.  Someone else said that places like gamespot will give you the actual beta game along with key.  I can't confirm if that's true though.



Gamespot had given on the PS3 beta keys, so it wouldn't be surprising to see it happen again.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 18, 2010)

I just pre-ordered with EA store and cancel my order with gamestop. It said something about I have to download the game in 30 days, what does this mean? What happen after that? It doesn't work like steam?


----------



## twicksisted (Jan 18, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> I just pre-ordered with EA store and cancel my order with gamestop. It said something about I have to download the game in 30 days, what does this mean? What happen after that? It doesn't work like steam?



yeah i bought a game through EA before... diddnt like the setup to be honest... you need to install EA Download Manager to get the game, download was slow in comparison to Steam and since i reformatted my pc i havent figured out how to reinstall the game and just gave up... was a shit game anyways MoH airborne


----------



## InnocentCriminal (Jan 18, 2010)

EA screwed my friends out of loads of games - they download them through the manager, had to reformat, downloaded the games again only for them to not to work because of a invalid licence key.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 18, 2010)

The DL manager from EA is annoying but workable. I use it to get my BF2142 patches and Northern Strike pack. The DL manager actually went offline a while back and finding now can be a pain in the ass. For what it's worth I payed for the Norther Strike pack over 3 years ago and I still have access to it. DL speeds right now are just as fast as Steam for me.... but I dont have a 94mb/s connection either, only 10mb/s.


----------



## kid41212003 (Jan 18, 2010)

I'm unable to login into my EA account. Can anyone try login in?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

*Update*

Dice will no longer provide information regarding BC2 on their own forums.  Instead they will tweet about it.  If lack of features were a problem this has only added fuel to the flames.  This has the members of that forum pretty upset about it.  Regardless if some agree or disagree with the decision made for BC2 the line of communication should always remain open and friendly.  It's part of customer relations.  
source.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 18, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Dice will no longer provide information regarding BC2 on their own forums.  Instead they will tweet about it.  If lack of features were a problem this has only added fuel to the flames.  This has the members of that forum pretty upset about it.  Regardless if some agree or disagree with the decision made for BC2 the line of communication should always remain open and friendly.  It's part of customer relations.
> source.



I'm starting to become concerned.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 18, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I'm starting to become concerned.



Don't be.. the devs tried to open the lines of communication and got shat on by the PC section. Sure the complaints were valid but they came off like /b/. 

In the end the devs cut the lines. BF:BC2 isn't a game that is designed FOR the PC. The best we can hope for is something that is ported well and that "looks and plays great". Not every game that is released for the PC has to cater to everything PC gamers want. We are now a minority and should learn to live with that fact. 

Hopefully there is enough motive (perspective sales) to keep the hopes of BF3 alive. 

I keep saying this but... even if all they do is add mouse/keyboard support to BC2 and call it a port it will still be awesome. The game is liquid awesome.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Jan 18, 2010)

TRIPTEX_MTL said:


> Don't be.. the devs tried to open the lines of communication and got shat on by the PC section. Sure the complaints were valid but they came off like /b/.
> 
> In the end the devs cut the lines. BF:BC2 isn't a game that is designed FOR the PC. The best we can hope for is something that is ported well and that "looks and plays great". Not every game that is released for the PC has to cater to everything PC gamers want. We are now a minority and should learn to live with that fact.
> 
> ...



I agree with ya man. My issue is they said they would cater to the PC community. If its a port then cool. Just dont lead us on like a 16 year old virgin on prom night.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 18, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I agree with ya man. My issue is they said they would cater to the PC community. If its a port then cool. Just dont lead us on like a 16 year old virgin on prom night.



They are still incorporating some of the features we're looking for.. They do have dedicated servers which was the main issue most people have with bad ports. I'll just wait and see how the game plays and I reserve my judgment for that date.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I agree with ya man. My issue is they said they would cater to the PC community. If its a port then cool. Just dont lead us on like a 16 year old virgin on prom night.



Exactly, this is a business we are talking about not about someone's personal feelings. 
Implying that they would cater to the PC community and shutting off communication is a contradiction to say the least and has nothing to do with any perception of the PC community as a whole.


----------



## Scrizz (Jan 18, 2010)

what is this?
a BC2 /b/fest?


----------



## erocker (Jan 18, 2010)

Scrizz said:


> what is this?
> a BC2 /b/fest?



Perhaps I should throw in complimentary "PENISPENISPENIS" post.

This game is still going to be damn fun.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Jan 18, 2010)

erocker said:


> Perhaps I should throw in complimentary "*PENISPENISPENIS*" post.
> 
> This game is still going to be damn fun.



Watch your mouth. 







This game will rock.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Jan 18, 2010)

Odd that I've not found a way to get into the beta without have to pre-order the game 1st. Or did I? 
Sign up there to see if you get a beta key.


----------



## 1Kurgan1 (Jan 19, 2010)

You guys must have gotten the last spots.


----------



## boise49ers (Jan 20, 2010)

I pre-ordered and it says it doesn't get released until the 9th. Huh ! 
I understood the release was the 2nd of March ?

This is copied directly from receipt:

ORDER SUMMARY
Product SKU: ******
Product Name: Battlefield: Bad Company™ 2 Limited Edition (Pre-Ordered)
pre-ordered release date: Tue Mar 09 02:00:00 CST 2010
Qty Ordered: 1
Amount: $49.95


----------



## shevanel (Mar 4, 2010)

TheMailMan78 said:


> I enjoy sniping for other snipers to be honest. I could care less about flags being capped or any of that unless I'm on a good team. Hunting for snipers with a high powered rifle is relaxing.



that's kind of how ive become in this game.. half the time i join a full server i have no idea WTF is going on so I grab the sniper rifle and just sit back, tag enemies with Q and pick off any snipers I see or the occasional infantry inside the buildings checking there moustaches in the windows.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Mar 4, 2010)

The SVU is a fun gun.  It is near silent.  So when you pop someone, while they know in general where it came from, they can't pinpoint your location.  If you stick and move, stick and move.  You can frustrate the enemy into hunting you.  The stick to ambush and C4 bombing.

That is how I relax as lone wolf.  Just see how many people on the enemy team I can distract into hunting me.

P.S.  Considering the title of this thread and it now being pretty much wrong since the PC version is pretty awesome (and everyone so far thinks so), should this not be closed?


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

Told you not to hold your breath, lol


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Mar 5, 2010)

And correction, most people thinks it is awesome.

Are you playing it East?  If so, what is your handle?


----------



## RoutedScripter (Mar 5, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Told you not to hold your breath, lol



So what's in the BC2 in particular that you not like 

I especially not like the fact that it supports only 32 players , and has no console.

IF there would be a console ,that would be another thing.


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Mar 5, 2010)

RuskiSnajper said:


> So what's in the BC2 in particular that you not like
> 
> I especially not like the fact that it supports only 32 players , and has no console.
> 
> IF there would be a console ,that would be another thing.



Why?  What did you need the console to do?

And while 32 people doesn't seem like a lot, it is a lot more intense then you think.


----------



## overclocking101 (Mar 5, 2010)

yeah a server with 32 players still has an imense amount of battle field action. im very happy with the game, pulling out my sniper rifle and blowing some heads off mmmm tasty


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

RuskiSnajper said:


> So what's in the BC2 in particular that you not like
> 
> I especially not like the fact that it supports only 32 players , and has no console.
> 
> IF there would be a console ,that would be another thing.



-White dot on the lower right corner.    What in the world is that there for?
-I can't join the TPU server unless a friend is playing.  Or else it's grayed out and unselectable
-Crappy dynamic ranges for audio.  Someone who is 15' away sound like they are right next to you.  Noise near some builds echoes when it shouldn't, etc
-Haven't received my vet status and they've taken down "My Solider" or whatever it's called.  No ETA when it will be back up.  I was going to use it to make sure my vet status is associated with my account.  However, I can't do that because "My Solider" website was taken down.  
-Both PB enabled and PB disabled servers are *ALL RANKED*!!  
-Extremely long wait times when refreshing server browser.  But if you stop it after 5 seconds all the servers will show up 2 seconds later.  Thus negating the unusual long wait. Which appears to be more induced for some reason.  
-You need a low ping in order to be competitive or else you're just cannon fodder
-Things like med pads, shocks, ammo box need to be unlocked which is unnecessary and convolute the unlock process.  
-The 55 FOV is a complete joke and although you can change it via settings.ini file it should be a slider from within the game with a small window showing you how your FOV will change.

I think I'll stop here for now I don't want to nitpick.



TheLaughingMan,
I sent you an invite.  I hope it's still working the next time your in game.


Edit:
Looks like server browser if finally allowing me to save servers now.  But are still grayed out in my favorites. Gee, with the EU release in a few hours.


----------



## OnBoard (Mar 5, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> -Crappy dynamic ranges for audio.  Someone who is 15' away sound like they are right next to you.  Noise near some builds echoes when it shouldn't, etc
> 
> -The 55 FOV is a complete joke and although you can change it via settings.ini file it should be a slider from within the game with a small window showing you how your FOV will change.



In Beta I got weird audio too, then I changed the audio either to hi-fi or something else and it was fixed. Can't remember anymore, but try another setting.

That 55 vertical FOV = 80 horizontal FOV, it's not that joke. 65 or 90 FOV would be default for widescreen. Borderlands FOV was a joke, that seriously messed my head instantly  Played Beta fine hours without any discomfort.

Other stuff doesn't sound that nice :/ Well it will still be closer to a week until my copy arrives, but at least I got it cheap! (29€/$39)


----------



## Glazierman (Mar 5, 2010)

Move over boys, and give me more ammo, LOL


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

OnBoard said:


> In Beta I got weird audio too, then I changed the audio either to hi-fi or something else and it was fixed. Can't remember anymore, but try another setting.
> 
> That 55 vertical FOV = 80 horizontal FOV, it's not that joke. 65 or 90 FOV would be default for widescreen. Borderlands FOV was a joke, that seriously messed my head instantly  Played Beta fine hours without any discomfort.
> 
> Other stuff doesn't sound that nice :/ Well it will still be closer to a week until my copy arrives, but at least I got it cheap! (29€/$39)



I've tried them all and they all do the same thing.


----------



## Kursah (Mar 5, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> -White dot on the lower right corner.    What in the world is that there for?
> -I can't join the TPU server unless a friend is playing.  Or else it's grayed out and unselectable



Haven't tried my clan's server or TPU's server, but beyond that there are other server issues that need dealt with. Though tonight was the most stable night yet...well since beta that is!



> -Crappy dynamic ranges for audio.  Someone who is 15' away sound like they are right next to you.  Noise near some builds echoes when it shouldn't, etc



Damn audiophiles! While I can't disagree, I also think this game features much better sound all around than pretty much any shooter from the last few years that I can recall, both in direction (at least for me) and tuning. Sure the sound has been more hollywooded up than most, it also somehow adds to the excitement of gameplay, which to me makes up for a lto of the directional mess...generally there's so much going on in servers I play, if you even hear a guy's footsteps that far away, you're on a boring, 1/4-stocked server (imo). This game's much more fun with more people at least that's how I enjoy it, and for me the sound pays off quite well for audio enjoyment overall. Some games might have better placement, but this game's more about the arcadish-fps experience, so effects are priority, at least to me that's what seems obvious.



> -Haven't received my vet status and they've taken down "My Solider" or whatever it's called.  No ETA when it will be back up.  I was going to use it to make sure my vet status is associated with my account.  However, I can't do that because "My Solider" website was taken down.



I did this back when Beta was still on, and it took instantly..though I went from 4 in beta to 2, it seems add-ons don't count. Now in the official release I'm just counted for 2 and 2142.



> _-Both PB enabled and PB disabled servers are ALL RANKED_


_!!_ 

I hope it get's fixed, but not the end of the world yet. But as I've said many times, for the total ignorant screw ups this game features, it's a damn good thing DICE has made this game fun as hell to play, or stuff like this and the rest of your list would denote it as crap in gaming history. It's amazing what the small things like dedicated servers can do...



> -Extremely long wait times when refreshing server browser.  But if you stop it after 5 seconds all the servers will show up 2 seconds later.  Thus negating the unusual long wait.



This and the long load times when loading a map either when joining a server or between matches is annoying...didn't notice this with my 260 and Beta...



> -You need a low ping in order to be competitive or else you're just cannon fodder



Sorry man, but it's an FPS...NO SH!T?!?!!?!?! I'm fine with 120 or less ping, above that and it's rough. Seems normal to me on that aspect.



> -Things like med pads, shocks, ammo box need to be unlocked which is unnecessary and convolute the unlock process.



Yeah, I do agree here, it's kind of annoying, but really doesn't take much to get to the point of unlocking them in any class...so at the same time kind of a moot point, generally the first round or two and you got it, though then you gotta wait to equip it so at least a theoretical 2-3 rounds before you have med pack, ammo, repair tool, etc.




> -The 55 FOV is a complete joke and although you can change it via settings.ini file it should be a slider from within the game with a small window showing you how your FOV will change.



Agreed, I found 70 in .ini much better for my 24" 1920x1080 setup and personal preference, but there should be a slider in-game for damn sure, especially by now...as much as I've seen it requested, it would be a nice token to have taken care of this issue already.
I think I'll stop here for now I don't want to nitpick.


You definitely have some solid points for arguments, and while I could nitpick too...even when I'm fighting the game to play, it's been worth it when I can play. At this point I think AvP is less buggy and as much as I forced myself to play that game which I have few issues with, I'd rather deal with the issues to play this game. I skipped MW2, can't play CoD4 or WaW anymore, and really for a modern FPS, this game has promise...but DICE delivered as expected, and while somewhat dissapointing, it's also VERY refreshing in my mind on quite a few aspects that have needed to have been executed for a while and it's kinda sad some of those took this long to happen. So yeah, plenty of good and bad, hell some parts where the Beta was waaaay more stable or enjoyable, and other parts where the official release kept it's word, even so, I'd give the game a solid 8-8.5 overall. And while I've yet to see the perfect game, no such single game will be that "perfect" game for each and every player, this one is the next most enjoyable one for me since BF2 and CoD4 for MP in all honesty.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

Kursah said:


> Haven't tried my clan's server or TPU's server, but beyond that there are other server issues that need dealt with. Though tonight was the most stable night yet...well since beta that is!


They've released R4 servers but are slow in implementing them.  This is something that should have done before release day not a few days ofter release.  



Kursah said:


> Damn audiophiles! While I can't disagree, I also think this game features much better sound all around than pretty much any shooter from the last few years that I can recall, both in direction (at least for me) and tuning. Sure the sound has been more hollywooded up than most, it also somehow adds to the excitement of gameplay, which to me makes up for a lto of the directional mess...generally there's so much going on in servers I play, if you even hear a guy's footsteps that far away, you're on a boring, 1/4-stocked server (imo). This game's much more fun with more people at least that's how I enjoy it, and for me the sound pays off quite well for audio enjoyment overall. Some games might have better placement, but this game's more about the arcadish-fps experience, so effects are priority, at least to me that's what seems obvious.


This is still a problem and has nothing to do with being an audiophile.  Audio cues in this game are poor thus making the overall sound quality of the game poor.  Being able to hear something  doesn't make the audio quality better, that's just a fallacy.  The overall presentation of the audio is what makes it great.  This is where the game fails. 



Kursah said:


> I did this back when Beta was still on, and it took instantly..though I went from 4 in beta to 2, it seems add-ons don't count. Now in the official release I'm just counted for 2 and 2142.
> 
> [/i]!![/I]
> 
> I hope it get's fixed, but not the end of the world yet. But as I've said many times, for the total ignorant screw ups this game features, it's a damn good thing DICE has made this game fun as hell to play, or stuff like this and the rest of your list would denote it as crap in gaming history. It's amazing what the small things like dedicated servers can do...


This is what I call a bias point of view.  Although you are entitled to have one it's clear why you answer in the fashion that you do.  




Kursah said:


> This and the long load times when loading a map either when joining a server or between matches is annoying...didn't notice this with my 260 and Beta...
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry man, but it's an FPS...NO SH!T?!?!!?!?! I'm fine with 120 or less ping, above that and it's rough. Seems normal to me on that aspect.


Did you forget that the opposite is true for COD games? Apparently it all depends on net code.  Which is what I was pointing out.  




Kursah said:


> Yeah, I do agree here, it's kind of annoying, but really doesn't take much to get to the point of unlocking them in any class...so at the same time kind of a moot point, generally the first round or two and you got it, though then you gotta wait to equip it so at least a theoretical 2-3 rounds before you have med pack, ammo, repair tool, etc.


It's not moot to expect a game to work as intended on release day.  Again, another bias point of view.  I am not "just happy" the game is finally released.  It should be working as intended.  





Kursah said:


> Agreed, I found 70 in .ini much better for my 24" 1920x1080 setup and personal preference, but there should be a slider in-game for damn sure, especially by now...as much as I've seen it requested, it would be a nice token to have taken care of this issue already.
> I think I'll stop here for now I don't want to nitpick.


I don't think your nitpicking but painting a broad brush of bias into your opinion of the current situation of the game.  It is what it is at this point, a borked game.  And it needs to be fixed.  But there is no eta on another patch and if they will address all the issues found.  There are many more that I've not posted in this thread that IMO need to be fixed.  



Kursah said:


> You definitely have some solid points for arguments, and while I could nitpick too...even when I'm fighting the game to play, it's been worth it when I can play. At this point I think AvP is less buggy and as much as I forced myself to play that game which I have few issues with, I'd rather deal with the issues to play this game. I skipped MW2, can't play CoD4 or WaW anymore, and really for a modern FPS, this game has promise...but DICE delivered as expected, and while somewhat dissapointing, it's also VERY refreshing in my mind on quite a few aspects that have needed to have been executed for a while and it's kinda sad some of those took this long to happen. So yeah, plenty of good and bad, hell some parts where the Beta was waaaay more stable or enjoyable, and other parts where the official release kept it's word, even so, I'd give the game a solid 8-8.5 overall. And while I've yet to see the perfect game, no such single game will be that "perfect" game for each and every player, this one is the next most enjoyable one for me since BF2 and CoD4 for MP in all honesty.



Your responses clearly come off as eristic, stilted and bias at times.  It's as if you took offense of the many issues with this game.  More over, the issues that should not be in the game.  Overall, the things I've seen and expressed here degrades the game to a 4 out of 10.  The potential is there which is why it doesn't get a 0 but if you can't play the game as intended (including all the perks that you should get with the game) do to bugs then giving the game a high score is just being disingenuous.  

Sure the game maybe fun to you but it's not the end all be all of the game that can overshadow the many problems found in how it was developed.  In order for the game to be enjoyable and not just fun major bugs needs to be fixed ASAP.  Let me put it in another way.  A cake well presented may look appetizing but if the ingredients put into it are not done properly eating the cake will change your opinion of it.  The same applies to this game.


----------



## TRIPTEX_CAN (Mar 5, 2010)

If this game was a cake I'd have sex with it. 

Eastcoast.. your personal opinions of this game are extremely depressing. Sure the game isn't perfect but since PC gamers in general have less and less epic shooters to play we might as well enjoy it for what it's worth. $50.. yes only $50 with no monthly payments or contracts. I pay this much for a good steak which only lasts me few hours (from consumption to combustion) so get off your horse and get in the game, or don't. Either way this thread is fail.

*unsubscribed.


----------



## kid41212003 (Mar 5, 2010)

Many of us have encountered problems, but we are still able to enjoy the game. I played the game with other TPUers last night for 3 hours straight, and It didn't crash me. I had some problems joining the servers, a log-off and relog worked for me all the time.

No matter what your opinion are, people, TPUers are playing this game, and all the fun overshadowed all the bugs. Because, i'm seriously having fun with this game.

All the problems so far are related to connection issues, which can be explained quite easily, dedicated servers, and EA has no direct control over them. And in the beta, none of these problems were there.

The cake looks bad, and smell bad, but that doesn't mean it tastes bad. This is a correct way to say it. A game is judged by gameplay, not by bugs. They WILL fix it, bugs are bugs, it's not intentional. If you don't think this is true, just return every single game that have bugs that annoy you so much you can't able to enjoy it.

I rated this game 9.9/10 for MP, the SP is not the best but above average. You don't reduce a video card point reviews because drivers kept crashing the card, the score is N/A when you can't do the test.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

TRIPTEX_MTL said:


> If this game was a cake I'd have sex with it.
> 
> Eastcoast.. your personal opinions of this game are extremely depressing. Sure the game isn't perfect but since PC gamers in general have less and less epic shooters to play we might as well enjoy it for what it's worth. $50.. yes only $50 with no monthly payments or contracts. I pay this much for a good steak which only lasts me few hours (from consumption to combustion) so get off your horse and get in the game, or don't. Either way this thread is fail.
> 
> *unsubscribed.


So instead of being depressed that the game's insurmountable bugs aren't' fixed yet you blame me for mentioning them.  Nice.  Folks this is called "shooting the messenger" and he does it in spades here.  It's apparent that your problem with what I've posted is that it's true and posting about it upsets you.  Sorry, but I think the person asking for my opinion of the game is entitled to my experience with it.







kid41212003 said:


> Many of us have encountered problems, but we are still able to enjoy the game. I played the game with other TPUers last night for 3 hours straight, and It didn't crash me. I had some problems joining the servers, a log-off and relog worked for me all the time.  No matter what your opinion are, people, TPUers are playing this game, and all the fun overshadowed all the bugs. Because, i'm seriously having fun with this game.


This really has nothing to do what my post.  I didn't mention anything about crashes nor did I mention anything about overall opinion of this game.  I only presented my own opinion of this game.  If you want to reply to me please do so in the context that I've posted, thanks.



kid41212003 said:


> Again
> 
> All the problems so far are related to connection issues, which can be explained quite easily, dedicated servers, and EA has no direct control over them. And in the beta, none of these problems were there.


This is actually incorrect as there are other problems with this game (for the most part mentioned already).



kid41212003 said:


> The cake looks bad, and smell bad, but that doesn't mean it tastes bad. This is a correct way to say it. A game is judged by gameplay, not by bugs. They WILL fix it, bugs are bugs, it's not intentional. If you don't think this is true, just return every single game that have bugs that annoy you so much you can't able to enjoy it.


Wrong analogy, remember they were the ones who enticed players to this game with dedicated server's, etc.  So it's the outward appearance that's fine in this case.



kid41212003 said:


> I rated this game 9.9/10 for MP, the SP is not the best but above average. You don't reduce a video card point reviews because drivers kept crashing the card, the score is N/A when you can't do the test.


And I still see it as 4 and I can see why there is such disparity here.  I wasn't "anticipating this game" as you have.  And that's fine in my book.  However, it clearly shows bias none the less.


----------



## bpgt64 (Mar 5, 2010)

About the only bug I have encountered is the long time to load/rehresh servers.  Outside of that, the game is epic, I mean all they had to do was update the formula of 1942...and your set.  Don't mess with it if it ain't broke.


----------



## kid41212003 (Mar 5, 2010)

My posts are usually not direct to one person's post. That's why I didn't quote anyone or im too lazy to do so.

You said it like they intention put up dedicate servers and then make it buggy like hell. It's not like I'm forcing myself playing a game for hours, and not enjoying it. Because none of them related to gameplay. Again, bugs are bugs, and it will be fixed, you might want to put it down for a month before getting back to this game, or just return it. This is not exactly a bug report thread, 'cause none of us have any power to fix the game.

Questions are understandable, but all your posts seem so depressing in a way that "I don't care about playing this game I just want to find bugs". Anyone who joined in this thread care about playing this game, and if you can't give solutions, it doesn't matter what problems you could found.

Bias or not, the majority of people here ignored the problems. I'm looking at a brighter side of the game and it helps me to enjoy this game, because i'm actually care about playing this game.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

kid41212003 said:


> My posts are usually not direct to one person's post. That's why I didn't quote anyone or im too lazy to do so.


Really?  Perhaps that's why you actually quoted me then replied to each point I made.  




kid41212003 said:


> You said it like they intention put up dedicate servers and then make it buggy like hell. It's not like I'm forcing myself playing a game for hours, and not enjoying it. Because none of them related to gameplay. Again, bugs are bugs, and it will be fixed, you might want to put it down for a month before getting back to this game, or just return it. This is not exactly a bug report thread, 'cause none of us have any power to fix the game.


My intention was to give him my opinion of the game as asked of me.  As for the cake analogy the outward appearance of the game is actually fine.  It's when you get into the game are there glaring problems.  



kid41212003 said:


> Questions are understandable, but all your posts seem so depressing in a way that "I don't care about playing this game I just want to find bugs". Anyone who joined in this thread care about playing this game, and if you can't give solutions, it doesn't matter what problems you could found.
> 
> Bias or not, the majority of people here ignored the problems. I'm looking at a brighter side of the game and it helps me to enjoy this game, because i'm actually care about playing this game.


I don't have to ask questions, I was asked what I didn't like about the game.  And I gave my view on what I noticed that should be fixed. In the end really has nothing to do with you or the alternative opinion you've formulated simply because I was asked for what I saw that I didn't like.


----------



## kid41212003 (Mar 5, 2010)

This is your thread, so I thought it in a different way, didn't know someone asked you for your opinions.

IMO, you're missing a great game. Possible best FPS MP game of this year.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

Now that's all cleared up where is the patch?


----------



## Scrizz (Mar 5, 2010)

omfg jeez, by reading your posts Eastcoast someone would think the game was unplayable and extremely shitty.

I know some people don't like EA but just give it a rest.
The game runs great, looks great, sounds great, and even plays great.
I would say this is one of the best shooters in the past 5-10 years.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

Scrizz said:


> omfg jeez, by reading your posts Eastcoast someone would think the game was unplayable and extremely shitty.
> 
> I know some people don't like EA but just give it a rest.
> The game runs great, looks great, sounds great, and even plays great.
> I would say this is one of the best shooters in the past 5-10 years.



L2R, my post was regarding to a question asked of me.  Those are just some of the current issues with the game.  As of right now, many can't play the game.  Making your comment self defeating .


----------



## Boneface (Mar 5, 2010)

Hope its ok to post this here, if not sorry. Just wanted to let you know my clan also has a server up, its HC, The *CoRe* Clan server.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

It's all good.  Thanks for the info.  I hope they fix the server browser so we can search by server name.  As of right now it appears that the main server is down.  So we can't do anything for the time being.


----------



## MatTheCat (Mar 5, 2010)

Scrizz said:


> omfg jeez, by reading your posts Eastcoast someone would think the game was unplayable and extremely shitty.
> 
> I know some people don't like EA but just give it a rest.
> The game runs great, looks great, sounds great, and even plays great.
> I would say this is one of the best shooters in the past 5-10 years.



I know.

Amongst the masses of gleaming 'reviews', there does seem to be a lot of negativity against the game for some reason. I mean, it is only ever bit as playable as Modern Warfare but with destructable elements that beat Crysis hands-down whilst still performing brilliantly.

The game is incredible...a real mile stone....Don't know what everyone is bitching about.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

MatTheCat said:


> I know.
> 
> Amongst the masses of gleaming 'reviews', there does seem to be a lot of negativity against the game for some reason. I mean, it is only ever bit as playable as Modern Warfare but with destructable elements that beat Crysis hands-down whilst still performing brilliantly.
> 
> The game is incredible...a real mile stone....*Don't know what everyone is bitching about*.



I read your post and thought the same thing.


----------



## ArmoredCavalry (Mar 5, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I read your post and thought the same thing.



I think the gameplay itself is amazing. Most fun I have had since COD4. Runs great, looks great.

Problem is with the networking....(beta was fine, now retail is horrible) Right now I can't even login, because I get "Failed to connect to EA Online"

I think I've played a total of like 5-6 rounds thanks to networking issues. -_-

I've been waiting for this game a long time, and I had high hopes that dedicated servers would make networking a breeze. Problem is DICE seems to have made it too dependent on the master EA server to work properly under huge loads.

I just hope that they get it all sorted out eventually, cause like I said, gameplay and graphics are amazing. Please don't let this turn into the FPS version of Demigod.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 5, 2010)

I couldn't agree with your more on this.  There are obvious networking issues and I think you hit the nail on the head that there is way to much dependency to the Master Server(s).  Yes, right now they are adding R5 servers and doing other maintenance work.  Hopefully that fixes all the of major issues.  But time will tell.


----------



## PVTCaboose1337 (Mar 5, 2010)

> The EA backend which controls most EA titles is suffering from an outage at the moment. The EA Online teams are working to find the cause and get servers back online as soon as possible



This just in from EA.  Servers down till 3am US Eastern time.


----------



## twicksisted (Mar 5, 2010)

dammit... its my fault guys... i was wishing that someone would go down on me... i diddnt expect it to be EA


----------



## Boneface (Mar 5, 2010)

That sucks, especially on wkend!


----------



## lemode (Mar 6, 2010)

twicksisted said:


> dammit... its my fault guys... i was wishing that someone would go down on me... i diddnt expect it to be EA


----------



## Kursah (Mar 6, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> They've released R4 servers but are slow in implementing them.  This is something that should have done before release day not a few days ofter release.



Yeah was just reading about that, should have been taken care of prior to release for damn sure.




> This is still a problem and has nothing to do with being an audiophile.  Audio cues in this game are poor thus making the overall sound quality of the game poor.  Being able to hear something  doesn't make the audio quality better, that's just a fallacy.  The overall presentation of the audio is what makes it great.  This is where the game fails.



I feel the sound is fine, you've hated the BC2 sound before you even got a chance to hear the game, but you brought up some very good points when you called it out. For me the sound is just fine, I really can't complain in this department as an overall experience. To get one thing straight I'm a casual gamer that doesn't need to know all the specs and internal workings, and maybe that's the difference between what you like/dislike and vice-versa.

But I do agree there is some room for improvement in this department, probably would take some serious reworking to achieve what you expect though, and it would shine that much more because of it. By no means is the sound a disappointment to my ears either, at the end of the day I believe audio is the least of this title's problems.



> This is what I call a bias point of view.  Although you are entitled to have one it's clear why you answer in the fashion that you do.





Glad I didn't need to leave any more clues for ya! 



> Did you forget that the opposite is true for COD games? Apparently it all depends on net code.  Which is what I was pointing out.



True, but with my experience with past Battlefield games, it's not much of a surprise...at least I wasn't offended by it, that and I can find plenty of servers with sub-100 ping using my DSL connection = me a happy gamer. 



> It's not moot to expect a game to work as intended on release day.  Again, another bias point of view.  I am not "just happy" the game is finally released.  It should be working as intended


.  

I do agree, but really unlocking ammo boxes, health packs and repair tools isn't really the end of the world, which is overall what I was focused on. Bias in your eyes or not, it's really not a big deal to me. I do agree this game should be working as intended at launch, and really look at about any PC game release these days and there are bugs, glitches and issues from day one, hell patches on Day 1 are becoming way too common imo. Normally that's a huge detraction for a game purchase, and sometimes anger and frustration because of such annoyances...for some reason this game doesn't offend me as much with some of it's bugs...which, sure I was hyped, but at the same time I expected a half-baked product to an extent. All I can hope is this game improves and at least most issues resolved sooner-than-later, there are some areas of failure where this title maybe could've used another month or two before release to get it right. It would've been worth the wait imo, too little too late now. It's out and it's either hate it or love it, play it or don't, and hope, just hope that maybe it'll get patched up.




> I don't think your nitpicking but painting a broad brush of bias into your opinion of the current situation of the game.  It is what it is at this point, a borked game.  And it needs to be fixed.  But there is no eta on another patch and if they will address all the issues found.  There are many more that I've not posted in this thread that IMO need to be fixed.



Well glad I got ya to think on my comments, nice work! 

I do agree the game is one big bug riddled release, but I will hand it some serious credit for the gaming enjoyment it's been able to provide in such a state that hopefully someday when (hopefully when and not "if") this game is patched up to par, it'll be that much better. If not and issues continue, I see this game dropping off the radar...but for now, I'm gonna enjoy it for what it is, I cannot get a refund, and frankly I'm still enjoying it as-is, but that doesn't mean it should stay that way. I will definitely tire of this title if the many issues and bugs present aren't properly taken care of, and that could deter me from interest in BF3 along with many other gamers out there.



> Your responses clearly come off as eristic, stilted and bias at times.  It's as if you took offense of the many issues with this game.  More over, the issues that should not be in the game.  Overall, the things I've seen and expressed here degrades the game to a 4 out of 10.  The potential is there which is why it doesn't get a 0 but if you can't play the game as intended (including all the perks that you should get with the game) do to bugs then giving the game a high score is just being disingenuous.



I had a couple to drink and had just completed the last of about a half dozen kickass rounds with my clan where I had no issues with gameplay, connection or the game itself...I gotta say that leaves me pretty damn content. I can't say I'd be offended at the many issues this game has to offer upon release, that'd just be ridiculous, I mean really...take it personally? The psyco-text- analyzations failed ya there! 

But hey read into my words however ya need to, as long as we're both happy with life at the end of the day, I could care less, though it is pretty entertaining to have someone read into my posts that much. Please do carry on man! I by no means am trying to be disrespectful, but it's nice to get a couple of chuckles out of your replies when you start digging in. I'm not after you or your points, in fact I'm agreeing with you, but at the same time pointing out that I can in-fact still get an enjoyable gaming experience for me, bias or not, that's how it is for my experience with BC2 thus far, not saying it'll always stay that way if a month from now the game is still in this condition...you may see a more angered and annoyed side of me.





> Sure the game maybe fun to you but it's not the end all be all of the game that can overshadow the many problems found in how it was developed.  In order for the game to be enjoyable and not just fun major bugs needs to be fixed ASAP.  Let me put it in another way.  A cake well presented may look appetizing but if the ingredients put into it are not done properly eating the cake will change your opinion of it.  The same applies to this game.



Very true, it's not and never will be and end-all game, no game ever will be, end of story. At the end of the day it's just a game, it plays well for me, I find plenty of servers with low ping, and really it could be a lot worse still, though it should be a lot better now. Here's a simple thought, if the ya dislike the game, don't play it, if you don't like the cake, don't eat it. So far I like the game, although it does need some serious patching to continue that trend, and I agree, definitely ASAP. 

I'll leave you to break down what I say here, looking forward to it! Pleasure talking to ya, and sorry you're so disappointed thus far, seems I'm getting more enjoyment out of the experience at this point, and there are no words that can be said to fix that...but DICE can sure as hell get the game up to par so everyone can enjoy it without glaring issues, bugs and 100's of threads like this one...it'd be nice to see a game released polished, stable, not needing patched and botched to keep it enjoyable for the masses...one can only dream of such things these days, which is truly unfortunate. Nice chatting with ya so far man, and here's to hoping that DICE can resolve the issues so both of us and the 1000's upon 1000's of other souls out there that picked up this title get what they paid for in full.


----------



## RoutedScripter (Mar 6, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


> -White dot on the lower right corner.    What in the world is that there for?
> -I can't join the TPU server unless a friend is playing.  Or else it's grayed out and unselectable
> -Crappy dynamic ranges for audio.  Someone who is 15' away sound like they are right next to you.  Noise near some builds echoes when it shouldn't, etc
> -Haven't received my vet status and they've taken down "My Solider" or whatever it's called.  No ETA when it will be back up.  I was going to use it to make sure my vet status is associated with my account.  However, I can't do that because "My Solider" website was taken down.
> ...



Totally Agree with you , it does have sense , that are those details and small annoyances that make the game feel a lot less like it actually is , Im not saying  the game is bad because of this , but it's these 10% of polishing that does A LOT of improvement in the gameplay.  

And I can't tell you , how i HATE this stupid Xbox habbit FOV @ 65 or 55 or whatever , I HATE it , I Want console to change it to 80 as it IS a standard in "ALL" fps PC games , ofcourse there was a bit of consolecrap influence in cod4 cod5 and mw2 , they all had 65 default. but at least the first two had a console thankfully 

And what a question there was: "why would i need console(ingame cvar console)" , well because im a PC gamer for example ? And want to change things how I like.


Kidding me, BC2 has 55 FOV ? this has to be a f joke , come on , you can't se shit around.

Im am actually going to test this in crysis ,  I'll set FOV to 55 , let me see how stupid would it be like , i'll report back.

I don't have BC2 yet , but bro ordered it as i expected , arrives tomorrow (i save money for more interesting things ...  )


----------



## Lionheart (Mar 6, 2010)

Finished the SP mode, I enjoyed it, more shorter than I thought it would be but decent story and a bit of humour here and there. now for the MP!


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Mar 6, 2010)

Kursah said:


> Yeah was just reading about that, should have been taken care of prior to release for damn sure.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That maybe your opinion but the truth of the matter is more in the facts.  We are not going to agree on this because you are willing to settle for it simply because you are already have a bias preference for the game.  So I wouldn't expect you to say otherwise. 




Kursah said:


> Glad I didn't need to leave any more clues for ya!


Nah, you didn't but at the same time you should understand that people (like myself) may not have such a point of view. 



Kursah said:


> True, but with my experience with past Battlefield games, it's not much of a surprise...at least I wasn't offended by it, that and I can find plenty of servers with sub-100 ping using my DSL connection = me a happy gamer.


Really? Your replies sure to come off like they do when it's mentioned 

.  


Kursah said:


> I do agree, but really unlocking ammo boxes, health packs and repair tools isn't really the end of the world, which is overall what I was focused on. Bias in your eyes or not, it's really not a big deal to me. I do agree this game should be working as intended at launch, and really look at about any PC game release these days and there are bugs, glitches and issues from day one, hell patches on Day 1 are becoming way too common imo. Normally that's a huge detraction for a game purchase, and sometimes anger and frustration because of such annoyances...for some reason this game doesn't offend me as much with some of it's bugs...which, sure I was hyped, but at the same time I expected a half-baked product to an extent. All I can hope is this game improves and at least most issues resolved sooner-than-later, there are some areas of failure where this title maybe could've used another month or two before release to get it right. It would've been worth the wait imo, too little too late now. It's out and it's either hate it or love it, play it or don't, and hope, just hope that maybe it'll get patched up.


The issue isn't about it being the end of the world it's about getting what you paid for.  If you order a beer and the waitress gave you only 1/2 a bottle of it I know you wouldn't say it isn't the end of the world after paying for it (IE: Bar were you have to pay for drinks up front ).   Hoping that the waitress will eventually come back unannounced with the other half of your beer before you and your buds leave for the evening.  lol




Kursah said:


> Well glad I got ya to think on my comments, nice work!


Dialogue can be a pain can't it? 




Kursah said:


> I do agree the game is one big bug riddled release, but I will hand it some serious credit for the gaming enjoyment it's been able to provide in such a state that hopefully someday when (hopefully when and not "if") this game is patched up to par, it'll be that much better. If not and issues continue, I see this game dropping off the radar...but for now, I'm gonna enjoy it for what it is, I cannot get a refund, and frankly I'm still enjoying it as-is, but that doesn't mean it should stay that way. I will definitely tire of this title if the many issues and bugs present aren't properly taken care of, and that could deter me from interest in BF3 along with many other gamers out there.


You mean you are enjoying it now during the down time?  Why, I can't seem to find any information about that in any of the reviews.  .  I think we can call it for what it is, game stopping bugs.  



Kursah said:


> I had a couple to drink and had just completed the last of about a half dozen kickass rounds with my clan where I had no issues with gameplay, connection or the game itself...I gotta say that leaves me pretty damn content. I can't say I'd be offended at the many issues this game has to offer upon release, that'd just be ridiculous, I mean really...take it personally? The psyco-text- analyzations failed ya there!
> 
> But hey read into my words however ya need to, as long as we're both happy with life at the end of the day, I could care less, though it is pretty entertaining to have someone read into my posts that much. Please do carry on man! I by no means am trying to be disrespectful, but it's nice to get a couple of chuckles out of your replies when you start digging in. I'm not after you or your points, in fact I'm agreeing with you, but at the same time pointing out that I can in-fact still get an enjoyable gaming experience for me, bias or not, that's how it is for my experience with BC2 thus far, not saying it'll always stay that way if a month from now the game is still in this condition...you may see a more angered and annoyed side of me.


The only problem with that, and I'm going to let you finish, is that the quality of the game isn't tangent on your opinion of it.  That's the beauty behind it.  All the bugs we've seen, downtime we are going through right now all paints a different picture.  



Kursah said:


> Very true, it's not and never will be and end-all game, no game ever will be, end of story. At the end of the day it's just a game, it plays well for me, I find plenty of servers with low ping, and really it could be a lot worse still, though it should be a lot better now. Here's a simple thought, if the ya dislike the game, don't play it, if you don't like the cake, don't eat it. So far I like the game, although it does need some serious patching to continue that trend, and I agree, definitely ASAP.


I laughed. But whatever makes you happy. In the end, if I am asked for my opinion of what issues I find with the game I'll continue to give it.  Therefore, this portion of your post does not have any relevance.  But I did get a good chuckle none the less.



Kursah said:


> I'll leave you to break down what I say here, looking forward to it! Pleasure talking to ya, and sorry you're so disappointed thus far, seems I'm getting more enjoyment out of the experience at this point, and there are no words that can be said to fix that...but DICE can sure as hell get the game up to par so everyone can enjoy it without glaring issues, bugs and 100's of threads like this one...it'd be nice to see a game released polished, stable, not needing patched and botched to keep it enjoyable for the masses...one can only dream of such things these days, which is truly unfortunate. Nice chatting with ya so far man, and here's to hoping that DICE can resolve the issues so both of us and the 1000's upon 1000's of other souls out there that picked up this title get what they paid for in full.


Never said anything of the such but I find it amusing that you've said it.  IE: If I point out issues with the game it must mean I hate it, etc.  I mean how else can you understand that the game has issues...  

At the end of the day we have a game that's currently unplayable and (per your own words) bug ridden.  Now was that so hard to see?  Nay, didn't think so.  But as with anything like this, don't hold your breath


----------



## RoutedScripter (Mar 6, 2010)

Lmao post ^^


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Mar 6, 2010)

Huh?  I missed something here.

I only have 1 issue with the game and I am hoping this mass update will fix it.  I am not sure if all these 20 paragraph rants and "discussions" do anything other than get people upset, so I will say this.

Shit happens.  There are some issues.  They are doing what they can to fix them as quickly as possible.  I can't hold issues with the game not working perfectly when it was released against it.  The game is great when you are playing it, IMO.  Now if I owned a game that has been out for several months with issues that were known since the first week of release and still have not been addressed, that would be cause to get pissed.

Historically speaking, I expect issues like this, even if a little down time is needed, to be address quickly.  The EA team for BFBC2 has been responsive to opinions, questions, suggestions, etc. mainly because they play the game.  Not because they are paid to, but because the testers and developers actually like playing Battlefield.  I would even venture to say they are just as pissed as we are about these issues.


----------



## twicksisted (Mar 6, 2010)

TheLaughingMan said:


> Huh?  I missed something here.
> 
> I only have 1 issue with the game and I am hoping this mass update will fix it.  I am not sure if all these 20 paragraph rants and "discussions" do anything other than get people upset, so I will say this.
> 
> ...



+1

shit happens... its first day of release... yes its a weekend... and guess what trheyre working on a fix as we speak....not waiting till office hours on monday


----------



## Kursah (Mar 6, 2010)

EastCoasthandle said:


>



Well played sir, gotta say this thread has been lit up from it's dim status from weeks ago, and I'm damn happy it was around to perk my interest! Glad we both got some good laughs out of all this. At the end of the day, BC2-wise still a fun game as bug riddled as it can be, especially when you bring server comms into the picture.

Haven't tried playing tonight yet, but I will here in the next hour or two. Haven't really given SP a chance as of yet, so I suppose I could go after that if the servers are still down. Hope to see ya on in this bug riddled release that we're still waiting to play after release. And I'm even ignorantly looking forward to "trying" to play this game more! Either rate, hope to see ya online later on if things are up and running!


----------



## TheLaughingMan (Mar 6, 2010)

Update:  Easy just posted that the TPU server is back up and people have reported playing as of now.  If you have it saved in favorites, give it a shot.  If you do not, give it a shot anyway.


----------



## pjladyfox (Mar 10, 2010)

Hey guys!

Came up with this stuff via trial and error as well as some research for my clan mates that I wished to share with all of you. Skimmed thru this thread to make sure this was not listed but if any of it is duplicated I do apologize.

1. Regardless of what difficulty you choose in single player you will NOT be able to disable the crosshairs. I even looked in the .ini files and could not see any way to disable them. However, during multiplayer if the server is configured for hardcore mode by default the crosshairs will be disabled unless the server admin adjusts the default settings.

2. If you hit "New Campaign" under Single Player it WILL overwrite your previous save without prompting you. I managed to lose a few hours of progress due to this which was frustrating to say the least. 

3. Bad Company 2 stores your single-player save information in the Documents/BFBC2 folder as a file called GameSettings.bin. Now here is the kicker in that the game does not warn you when you reset or overwrite this file so be sure that if you wish to make sure you do not lose anything you backup this file and keep it in a folder titled for the save game you are backing up and when.

Now, that said, if you have Windows Vista Business, Enterprise, or Ultimate you have access to a feature called Shadow Copy. By right-clicking on the BFBC2 folder you should be able to access the "Previous Versions" tab and restore the game save file to the one before it was overwritten by the game.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure if Windows 7 Home Premium has it but I'll check once I get home. However, the feature should be present in Win7 Business, Enterprise, or Ultimate.

5. Here are some FOV settings for those of you who do not wish to stick with the default of 55:

1280x768 or 1920x1080 - 70 or 75
1680x1050 or 1920x1200 - 80 or 85

I've got mine set to 75 at 1920x1200 and it seems to be working perfectly for me with none of the motion sickness I had in the Beta.

You can adjust these by going into your My Documents (or Documents) folder and adjusting the settings.ini file; the entry for FOV is labeled Fov=

6. If you wish to manually set either DirectX 9, 10, or 11 rendering go into your My Documents (or Documents) folder and adjust the settings.ini file; the entry for this is DxVersion=. Just switch it from Auto which is default to either 9, 10, or 11.

7. During single player be sure to pickup weapons since these will count towards your Collectables. You do NOT need to carry these with you just pick them up and it will record them by giving you a notification.

8. You will not receive ANY of your Veteran unlocks when you first start playing until after you rank up once.

9. Just like with previous Battlefield titles it will not instantly record your kills for a particular game and can take upwards to an hour before they will appear in your profile.

10. If you are instantly getting disconnected from multiplayer servers follow the steps here at http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/b...-connect.html:

Here are a few steps to try to connect to servers:

# Uninstall the BC2 BETA
# Look in MY Documents for BC2 BETA directory. If it exists delete it.
# Look where BC2 BETA was installed, if the BC2 BETA directory remains, delete it.
# Try running the game again.

For all the players connecting to servers and being kicked straight away (and pbsetup.exe or manual updating didn't help) then you will be happy to know we are sending out R4 servers to our hosting providers which will hopefully solve this issue.

This is going out to the hosts shortly and then allowing time for them to update you should see connections going back to normal in the next few hours and continuing to spread to all servers during this evening.

11. You will not be able to skip the introduction cinematic in single player or at least I've not been able to skip it even if I've already played thru the mission. If anyone finds a way to bypass this or the starter level do please post it here.

12. Tired of the buggy "waiting for data" message you get when you try and add a server to your favorites? Well, if you follow these steps you'll be adding servers to your list in no time!

a. Go into your My Documents (or Documents folder under Vista/Win7) and locate a folder titled BFBC2. Path should be something like C:\Documents and Settings\Administrator\My Documents\BFBC2

b. Open the GameSettings.ini and scroll down to the bottom where you should see an entry titled FavoriteGames=

c. Type in the title of the server you wish to add, such as Stompfest.com CHI #3 Conquest Hardcore, after the =. Be sure that if you wish to add multiple servers separate them with a comma. Also be sure that the last server in the entry has a ; or it will not list the servers in your Favorites list and may even erase your GameSettings.ini file.

13. If you have two different systems that you play on you will want to copy the entire BFBC2 over to the other system since your single-player save file, Favorite server list, and other things are stored locally rather than on the BC2 servers. The only hiccup you may encounter is with video settings if your other system uses a different monitor and/or hardware than your home system.


----------

