hey im just woundering what you would rate bf2 on a scale of 1-10

At the beginning - a solid 8 out of ten. Now EA has screwed about it, minus 5.6 out of ten.

I think its Excellent!

Oh apart from the server crashes, oh and the crash to desktop i often get after loading a map, oh and the year old red tag bug, oh and the medals criteria always being downgraded just after I've worked my ass off to get it, oh and the pointless patches with new bugs, oh and the people who stand on/in front your plane, oh and then they punish you, oh the idiots who punish you for accidental TK, oh the people who TK you for a plane/helo, oh the noobs who shoot you out your plane with an M95 to get it, oh the the pilots who purposly ram jets into helos... The list goes on

However, I'm still playing it but I take my meds first and play in a sound proof room.

[offtopic]

Let's get this out of the way first
a) where's the poll? i don't see a question list!
b) i think your keyboard is broken, caps-lock seems to have a mind of it's own (or you like to shout)

j/k

[/offtopic]

The BF2 game on it's own is great, thanks to great ingredients like the concept, gameplay, freedom to move around. It builds on it's predecessers and with good teamplay in the field it's addicting. If i have to rate the game it gets a solid 8.

But it could have been so much better, game is out for about a year, and we still have the red-name "feature", crashes, fixes "everybody" wanted to be incorperated etc. If only EA/Dice would have taken the time, before starting on the expansions and the unevetable "sequel" in the discuise of BF2142 but alas.

0 of 10.

Good points:

1) In theory, good multiplayer team game with a wide variety of roles to play.


Bad points:

1) HORRIBLE engine. Lag, fps drops, long load times, all for graphics that are underwhelming at best. There is no excuse for making such a poorly optimized engine, especially one that is supposed to handle large numbers of players at once.

2) The absolute morons online. Sure, in theory you might be able to get a good game, but in the real world, you're more likely to be TK-ed, pinned on the ground by a moron who's mad at you for taking "his" plane and stands in front of you so you can't take off without a TK-ban, and then banned for dropping an airstrike that wipes out an entire enemy force and one member of your own team.

3) No bots. Sure, they might not be as good as real human players, but the lack of bots turns what could've been an amazing LAN game into a waste of time. 4 human players with bot support is fun. 4 human players on a 30-person map is not.

4) Awful server browser. What else can be said here?

5) "Expansions" that are little more than a patch, but cost full price.





Of all the tactics people complain about, I've never understood this one. Why is this a bad thing? It's a perfectly effective tactic. If I can trade my plane and one respawn for several enemy respawns and stop their attack, why shouldn't I ram it out of the sky? Sure, using missiles/guns might be better, but you don't always have time for that. I'd rather ram it than let it escape to drop a load of players on my team's unprotected rear flag.

1. Nothing wrong with the engine, game looks/sounds great imo
2. Play on a well admined server hint, GamingSource.net
3. The vulk wants to play with bots?
4. Agreed although most people use Qtracker
5. SF is not my cup o' tea however EF & AF rule

The actual game is great, the problem has been patching & post purchase support which has been abysmal.

7.5 out of 10, not enough badass weapons and vehicles to keep me hooked. the expansion pack was better tho

You must be blind then. The level of detail is awful, the lighting effects don't exist, the textures are some of the worst I've ever seen. Maybe on a top-end system the game improves to mediocre, but there's absolutely no justification for the high system requirements. The game just doesn't give a sane appearance/requirements ratio.



Yeah, I'm sure I'll have a lot of fun with my 5000 ping. That's the other problem, 95% of the servers had really high ping. I want to play the game, not spend an hour looking for a decently mature server with a playable ping every time I decide to play.

This is just a fatal issue for a multiplayer game. I play counterstrike when I'm in the mood for a fps. Why? Is it the best fps ever? Absolutely not. But it has excellent server support. A minute after loading the game, I'm playing on a low-ping server with my choice of map. And while my teammates might not be the brightest ever, friendly fire is off 95% of the time and they only get themselves killed, not me.


Ever hear of LAN parties? BF2 would have made an excellent LAN game, but the maps are too big to play without bots.


====================


And I should add another point:

FRIENDLY FIRE

Whatever moron thought adding friendly fire to the game deserves to be shot. More than anything else, this just ruins the game completely and gives the exploiters a whole pile of toys to play with.

1. Your system is gay. BF2 on high is eye candy galore
2. Try visiting dontcamp, straferight, AGB Gaming, MoonGamers; all of em have extremely well admined BF2 servers. There I've done the hard work for you.
3. Never been to a LAN party, don't ever intend to.

Conceded Valve provides excellent support for their games, DICE Sweden transferred BF2 support to DICE Canada whom are a bunch of worthless sh!tpickers so they could work on 2142 asap.

Even on my brother's computer, which was the absolute top-end at the time BF2 was released, it looked mediocre at best.


Remember the part about ping? If it has over 30 ping, it isn't worth my time. In BF2, much more so than in other games I've played, the odds of the low-ping servers being moron-free are very small.



Sucks to be you I guess. Having a couple friends over for some games is a lot of fun if you get the right games. Sadly BF2 isn't one of them, even though it had so much potential to be one.

The game's not called 'Tora-Tora'. I don’t think Mr. Hu Jintao would be pleased if his pilots rammed a $30M J-10 (which is cheap compared to the cost of a US made jet) into a helo just to kill a few guys. I know BF2 doesn't exactly excel in realism, but players should try and keep it as real as possible.

Personally, I would prefer if possible to shoot down the helo using cannons or missiles rather than ram the plane, die and then re-enter the mad frenzy to try and get a jet again with out being TK/shot out with M95/forced to run over the idiots standing in front of the plane.

Just my opinion

Keeping it Real as possible ! Yes MAdantUK this is my Attitude for playing BF2 , but ! those sh!tpickers (thx Mo for this ) Snipers with they`re Claymores are frustrating me , they run infront of a Full Squad and throw a clay in the round of taking the flag guys and BOOOOM 4 guys are Death dum only dum no skill just dum.I hate EA for putting this damn Clay in this GAme .

P.s.: Iam happy when Clays are damage you the half health

The claymores can be devastating. I think that the action of setting a claymore should take the player like 3 or 4 seconds. This way, they can not just throw one in front of you when you storm the flag etc. Hence you see the sniper laying the claymore and you have chance to blast his ass before he finishes.

At the minute he runs into your firestorm, throws the claymore anywhere, and dies from your G36C whatever, and then two seconds later your squad is wiped out by someone triggering the explosive.

However, I can’t complain too much as I partly used this technique to get my expert Explosives badge (albeit, a bit more care was taken not to die)

Cheers,

MadAnt

*laughs*

That must be the funniest thing I've heard all day. BF2 and realistic in the same sentence... *dies laughing*.

When they take out bunny hopping, multiple rifle headshots to kill a person, the absurd physics model, re-arming by simply flying over the carrier at full speed, etc, then I'll give some consideration to the realism of my tactics. BF2 is a game, nothing more.


Of course, I would too. If nothing else, it keeps the uninterrupted bombing runs going longer. But if it's a choice between ram the target or lose a flag, it's ramming time. The insanely tiny map sizes in BF2 keep you from making a proper strafing run, so it's pretty easy to find yourself in a situation where the helicopter just dropped flares, and you don't have enough time to take it down with guns before you overshoot.

I have annoying memories of emptying a nice long burst into a helicopter, and it somehow surviving. And then when I couldn't pull out in time to dodge the very not-dead helicopter, I get yelled at for "noob tactics". Despite a favorable point loss ratio, and stopping the assault on my team's flag...

I agree that sometimes you can end up hitting a helo becuase the damb thing just wont explode even after emptying a sh*t load of hot lead into it. You just think it will go any second, it will go.... oh boll8cks

Howeven IMO i think ramming helos is a cheap tactic - but this is just my opinion

Hey, back from holiday...

rating (without reading the entire topic because i am too lame) i'd say an 8 if they fix all the bugs. Since these bugs and errors pretty much scr*w up the game i'd say a 6.

The fun in the game is because of the scoring system that get's you back to the virtual battlefield.

Propably 5

4 for great multiplayer gaming
1 for good graphics

-2 for lacking single player
-3 for those Loooooooong loading screens

My rating is going down day by day, it was about an 8 but the crashes to desktop are just so frusstrating so save myself from the stress I've just stopped playing until a new patch comes out. Does anyone know when it'll be? Why they dont just release a hotfix or something i dont know.

HS

In most cases this is not BF2's "fault" but your own. In other words you PC isn't "up-to-spec" fast rigs have the benefit here (there was a time when a new map loaded i always was the first one in, and then could strawl my way over to the jets, pick the one with the best paint-job and take off, usually arriving at the enemy base around the time they started spawning in)