BF2 wihtout EA

2006-11-27 20:25:48

#1

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7152|67.222.138.85

EA has gotten a lot of flack from BF2 due to it's customer support and sheer amount of bugs. Do you feel that if the same idea as BF2 were given to a different game company (such as Blizzard) to develop it would have turned out better? Would the patches still have the same problems and the customer support the same?

Remember that BF2 is very one-of-a-kind, and I'm sure it takes a lot more coding than your run-of-the-mill fps.

2006-11-27 20:28:17

#2

Mr.Casual: p-n*|3eergogglz; +136|6954|Minnesota eh

I would say it would be a more overall stable and balanced game. If ubisoft did it, it wouild be better no questions asked. imo

2006-11-27 20:28:29

#3

Archer: rapes face; +161|6869|Canuckistan

If Valve had it, it would've been more played than CSS.

Possibly WarCraft, provided that they do good shit with the franchise.

Blizzard would probably turn it into a military MMORPG, which would be gay unless it was MMOFPS.

EDIT: Ubisoft? I think they're only insanely good at single player games, tbh.

Last edited by Archer (2006-11-27 20:29:07)

2006-11-27 20:28:34

#4

Miller: IT'S MILLER TIME!; +271|7201|United States of America

It could be better, it could be worse, just be happy with what it is now.

2006-11-27 20:28:45

#5

{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank: U.S. > Iran; +497|7023|Florida

Well, with WoW, Blizzard charges for online play. $15 a month from what a co-worker told me. I downloaded it and was playing the 10 day trial for it, and actually considered getting the game to play it until I found that out.

I think paying memberships for online play is stupid, but Im willing to bet that Blizzard has better support for the game than EA does for BF2.

2006-11-27 20:28:46

#6

Fenris_GreyClaw: Real Хорошо; +826|6964|Adelaide, South Australia

as soon as they brought in IO, BF2 stopped being one-of-a-kind.

if Blizzard did it? there'd be more unlocks.

If Ubisoft did it? guns would be more powerful.

If Atari did it? there would only be 12 guns, but they all have 2 different firing modes.

Archer wrote:
If Valve had it, it would've been more played than CSS.

Possibly WarCraft, provided that they do good shit with the franchise.

Blizzard would probably turn it into a military MMORPG, which would be gay unless it was MMOFPS.

EDIT: Ubisoft? I think they're only insanely good at single player games, tbh.

MMORPGFPS?

Last edited by Fenris_GreyClaw (2006-11-27 20:29:42)

2006-11-27 20:29:34

#7

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7165|California

It sucks as a game, but its awesome, nonetheless.

the developers of Desert Combat are working with KAOS studios to release a BF2-style FPS in Q3 2007.
So essentially, its BF2 but better

2006-11-27 20:30:45

#8

Archer: rapes face; +161|6869|Canuckistan

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
as soon as they brought in IO, BF2 stopped being one-of-a-kind.

if Blizzard did it? there'd be more unlocks.

If Ubisoft did it? guns would be more powerful.

If Atari did it? there would only be 12 guns, but they all have 2 different firing modes.

Archer wrote:
If Valve had it, it would've been more played than CSS.

Possibly WarCraft, provided that they do good shit with the franchise.

Blizzard would probably turn it into a military MMORPG, which would be gay unless it was MMOFPS.

EDIT: Ubisoft? I think they're only insanely good at single player games, tbh.
MMORPGFPS?

Yeah, see Planetside.

2006-11-27 20:31:58

#9

R3v4n: We shall beat to quarters!; +433|6931|Melbourne

No, i think if DICE and EA had nothing to do with this game it would be better. But you cant kill the Snake if you only chop off the tail

~ Do you not know that in the service … one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?

2006-11-27 20:32:07

#10

Fenris_GreyClaw: Real Хорошо; +826|6964|Adelaide, South Australia

Archer wrote:
Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
as soon as they brought in IO, BF2 stopped being one-of-a-kind.

if Blizzard did it? there'd be more unlocks.

If Ubisoft did it? guns would be more powerful.

If Atari did it? there would only be 12 guns, but they all have 2 different firing modes.

Archer wrote:
If Valve had it, it would've been more played than CSS.

Possibly WarCraft, provided that they do good shit with the franchise.

Blizzard would probably turn it into a military MMORPG, which would be gay unless it was MMOFPS.

EDIT: Ubisoft? I think they're only insanely good at single player games, tbh.
MMORPGFPS?
Yeah, see Planetside.

What about 'Bet On Soldier'?

R3v4n wrote:
No, i think if DICE and EA had nothing to do with this game it would be better. But you cant kill the Snake if you only chop off the tail

you said what about MGS?

Last edited by Fenris_GreyClaw (2006-11-27 20:33:05)

2006-11-27 20:33:04

#11

pot_o_gold: Member; +4|6883

um if valve did it it wud be the sickest shit ever and probably more played than css hands down imagine a bf with no bugs, no glitches, more patches, and simply owners who care

2006-11-27 20:34:03

#12

Fenris_GreyClaw: Real Хорошо; +826|6964|Adelaide, South Australia

pot_o_gold wrote:
um if valve did it it wud be the sickest shit ever and probably more played than css hands down imagine a bf with no bugs, no glitches, more patches, and simply owners who care

Now imagine BF2 without vehicles... oh wait...

2006-11-27 20:34:53

#13

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7165|California

pot_o_gold wrote:
um if valve did it it wud be the sickest shit ever and probably more played than css hands down imagine a bf with no bugs, no glitches, more patches, and simply owners who care

Many things wrong with that.

Counter Strike is a 7 year refined game. Did you play version 1.00? PURE SHIT

that and the fact they moved the WHOLE franchise over to the source engine. Albeit Source would make BF2 amazing, there are plenty of awesome HL2 mods that will do the same (see: Insurgency mod)

2006-11-27 20:36:24

#14

Deadmonkiefart: Floccinaucinihilipilificator; +177|7151

Vehicles are what make BF2 great. They are 1/2 the fun. Without vehicles BF2 would just be another mediocre FPS.

2006-11-27 20:37:10

#15

Flaming_Maniac: prince of insufficient light; +2,490|7152|67.222.138.85

stryyker wrote:
the developers of Desert Combat are working with KAOS studios to release a BF2-style FPS in Q3 2007.
So essentially, its BF2 but better

Desert Combat + more weapons + 2142 maps + squads = pot 'o gold

Damn that was a good mod...that's where I first got my apache fix.

Last edited by Flaming_Maniac (2006-11-27 20:37:32)

2006-11-27 20:37:26

#16

[Spec]-=Colonel_Zero=-: Member; +21|6807|None ya

Miller wrote:
It could be better, it could be worse, just be happy with what it is now.

I agree. although theres are spome downs I would sstick with EA.

2006-11-27 20:37:59

#17

Mr.Casual: p-n*|3eergogglz; +136|6954|Minnesota eh

@ pot o gold

I agree that if valve did it it would be a more stable game, but it would probably turn out to be HL2 like, meaning better graphics, but lacking online fun. Also it would mean that less people could play it cause of the better graphics and physics.

@ fenris

If Ubisoft made it, i think that it would have been also more powerful guns, but thats what BF needs, not pea shooters like the guns in 2142.

Edit: feNris

Last edited by Mr.Casual (2006-11-27 20:45:13)

2006-11-27 20:38:09

#18

Fenris_GreyClaw: Real Хорошо; +826|6964|Adelaide, South Australia

#1) its Fenris
#2) i wasnt taking a stab at them, in fact i was merely commenting on relation to their other games. example:
Blizzard makes WoW. WoW has a ton of shit as items/unlocks.

Blizzard make BF2? more unlocks.
Ubisoft makes BiA/FarCry. they have damn powerful guns.

Ubisoft makes BF2? better guns.
Atari makes UT series. limited weapons, but they all shoot differently.

Atari makes BF2? more shooting styles.

Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Vehicles are what make BF2 great. They are 1/2 the fun. Without vehicles BF2 would just be another mediocre FPS.

Got IO?

Last edited by Fenris_GreyClaw (2006-11-27 20:42:31)

2006-11-27 20:39:28

#19

stryyker: bad touch; +1,682|7165|California

Flaming_Maniac wrote:
stryyker wrote:
the developers of Desert Combat are working with KAOS studios to release a BF2-style FPS in Q3 2007.
So essentially, its BF2 but better
Desert Combat + more weapons + 2142 maps + squads = pot 'o gold

Damn that was a good mod...that's where I first got my apache fix.

Ja Mon!

see more on that
http://www.frontlinesgame.com/
http://www.kaosstudios.com/

:>

2006-11-27 20:39:42

#20

Deadmonkiefart: Floccinaucinihilipilificator; +177|7151

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Vehicles are what make BF2 great. They are 1/2 the fun. Without vehicles BF2 would just be another mediocre FPS.
Got IO?

I do not like IO.

2006-11-27 20:40:13

#21

Archer: rapes face; +161|6869|Canuckistan

What about 'Bet On Soldier'?

I don't know about that, but it does look like a "MMOFPS"..

Bottom line, Valve would take the Battlefield series up, not down

.

eyesteponbabies wrote:
Edited by Boris

gtfo

Last edited by Archer (2006-11-27 20:40:44)

2006-11-27 20:43:32

#22

DonFck: Hibernator; +3,227|7076|Finland

Mr.Casual wrote:
I would say it would be a more overall stable and balanced game. If ubisoft did it, it wouild be better no questions asked. imo

Stability á la Ubisoft = Patches come already with the game package:

https://img221.imageshack.us/img221/9175/patchqm0.jpg

Moral of the story: No matter who makes it, bugs and glitches exist.

I need around tree fiddy.

2006-11-27 20:43:57

#23

Gen. Payne: Member; +50|7152|USA

Man, I thought Bet on Soldier sucked royally.

2006-11-27 20:44:08

#24

Fenris_GreyClaw: Real Хорошо; +826|6964|Adelaide, South Australia

Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:
Deadmonkiefart wrote:
Vehicles are what make BF2 great. They are 1/2 the fun. Without vehicles BF2 would just be another mediocre FPS.
Got IO?
I do not like IO.

i'm not commenting on whether you like IO, im saying that BF2 is now just another mediocre FPS, albeit with recorded stats. (<- which was nicked from UT2004, i might add.)

2006-11-27 20:46:57

#25

Mr.Casual: p-n*|3eergogglz; +136|6954|Minnesota eh

DonFck wrote:
Mr.Casual wrote:
I would say it would be a more overall stable and balanced game. If ubisoft did it, it wouild be better no questions asked. imo
Stability á la Ubisoft = Patches come already with the game package:

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/9175/patchqm0.jpg

Moral of the story: No matter who makes it, bugs and glitches exist.

I have not played that game, so you got me there. The other games from ubisoft i have played were stable so my bad.

BF2S Forums BF2 wihtout EA

Archer wrote:

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

Archer wrote:

Archer wrote:

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

Archer wrote:

R3v4n wrote:

pot_o_gold wrote:

pot_o_gold wrote:

stryyker wrote:

Miller wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

stryyker wrote:

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

eyesteponbabies wrote:

Mr.Casual wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

Fenris_GreyClaw wrote:

Deadmonkiefart wrote:

DonFck wrote:

Mr.Casual wrote:

Board footer