Would you still play without stats? imagine - no ranks, no stats, no ranked servers, just the actual game.
honestly?
or would you stop playing a lot earlier?
honestly?
or would you stop playing a lot earlier?
Again, the game was great in October/November last year when there was a mad rush for the first "few" generals in the game..
Once the Uber glitchers arrived on scene I personally stopped playing, or cut back severally. Was at 9th.. oh well.. I tried :S
So to answer your post, yes, get rid of the stats.. not needed, to many generals and the ranks are two easily obtained (got field commissioner gold in 4 weeks.. aw the 36 hour days)
Once the Uber glitchers arrived on scene I personally stopped playing, or cut back severally. Was at 9th.. oh well.. I tried :S
So to answer your post, yes, get rid of the stats.. not needed, to many generals and the ranks are two easily obtained (got field commissioner gold in 4 weeks.. aw the 36 hour days)
Can't say I'd be bothered, got all the unlocks now anyway. Be a bit of a shame to lose my place on the sniper leader boards but thats about it.
Whoever's idea it was to make the ranks easy to obtain was an idiot. It's no fun when everybody is a general.
"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell
Look people with no life can hunt other stuff than rank ok, DICE made this change so EVERYONE could enjoy it. Not just people who play it constant.
SargeV1.4 would you play BF2 then? or those who switched back to BF2 just to get silver rank? BF2 and BF2142 is about the rank and unlocks, if stats wasn't in both games it would been bad since start no fun at all, hunting down for the next rank was the thing that kept me going. But then overall I would play BF2142 more because it has more fun weapons and stuff you can use than BF2 and i don't need to worry about friking jets.
SargeV1.4 would you play BF2 then? or those who switched back to BF2 just to get silver rank? BF2 and BF2142 is about the rank and unlocks, if stats wasn't in both games it would been bad since start no fun at all, hunting down for the next rank was the thing that kept me going. But then overall I would play BF2142 more because it has more fun weapons and stuff you can use than BF2 and i don't need to worry about friking jets.
The stats system in this game is wrong. They should have thought of the fact that ( a lot of) people don't care about gameplay, it's the stats. Most of the awards are made so that you would get them eventually over time.
But people will not do that, they will always look for a way to gain them in no time. So people will whore airplanes, tanks, commanderposts just to gain certain awards much sooner as EA/DICE have intended.
I think that if i've got all the unlocks, i will be adapting a whole different playing style then the way i play now.
I think that 'you need to have 200 hours to get this bagde/ribbon/etc' makes people play more calculated and less part of the team.
For example, i need some serious points, so one of the ribbons i can get to help me with that, is one with a lot of teamleader hours. So instead of joining a team, i create one.
But i don't know shit about using commands to be an effective leader, and i have a 'tactic' to make me a steady ammount of points during the game (all legal, no glitching or padding), but i takes up all my time. So being a good teamleader gets in that way.
So people in my squad are just organised lone wolfs.
And somehow i hate that, but me wanting the unlocks is stronger, so, sorry.
But people will not do that, they will always look for a way to gain them in no time. So people will whore airplanes, tanks, commanderposts just to gain certain awards much sooner as EA/DICE have intended.
I think that if i've got all the unlocks, i will be adapting a whole different playing style then the way i play now.
I think that 'you need to have 200 hours to get this bagde/ribbon/etc' makes people play more calculated and less part of the team.
For example, i need some serious points, so one of the ribbons i can get to help me with that, is one with a lot of teamleader hours. So instead of joining a team, i create one.
But i don't know shit about using commands to be an effective leader, and i have a 'tactic' to make me a steady ammount of points during the game (all legal, no glitching or padding), but i takes up all my time. So being a good teamleader gets in that way.
So people in my squad are just organised lone wolfs.
And somehow i hate that, but me wanting the unlocks is stronger, so, sorry.
but with 40 unlocks ranks had to be easier to gain.
If you think people just took jet because to gain that badge then you really are wrong. Jets are practical invicible in the air only lsat patch and some before we could bring it down. Before they roamed the sky and couldn't be kill no mather how many missiles we launched at it only for it to come back and drop a bomb on use. They wanted high KD raito wich these gave. People would still whore stuff like tanks, APC, jets and choppers even if stats wasn't in.
but to the point where it takes 170 hours to get all of them? A little too easy to get imo.<<<FTDM>>>Gen.Raven wrote:
but with 40 unlocks ranks had to be easier to gain.
also, stats, i wouldn't care if they were gone. Though its interesting to have them there just so you know how much time you've wasted.
I would still play, and I would probably enjoy the game more. People wouldn't play for stats and ranks, and instead play just to have fun & win.
i like my stats...they keep me playing
Yeah. I would play any battlefield game without stats.
As fun as the game is while 'in the moment', I think its the stats that keep me playing, and trying to do well. For me, this system works really well because I can only play at most an hour a day...so actually getting to a high rank is possible eventually. I've played all the battlefield games, and while I really enjoyed 1942, and Vietnam, and the mods for those, I don't play them anymore simply because BF2/2142/special forces is just as fun, but has stats as an additional incentive. It seems fitting for an online multiplayer game to have stats.
Yes I would.. Same with bf2.. If there were no stats, all I would play, would be Day Of Defeat..
I would still play bit nothing like as often, it's a strive to get the next unlock, a target to aim for.
well when i got bf2 i didn't know there was ranks etc.. and liked the game even more when i found out,
Stats and Ranks are a part of the game and gameplay if they took that out Battlefield would be less enjoyable for me.
Only 170-200 hours to get the max rank? Geez, what are these guys thinking. Instead of trying to beat typical RPGs and other "long" games by a factor of 10, they should have gone for a factor of 100.gene_pool wrote:
but to the point where it takes 170 hours to get all of them? A little too easy to get imo.<<<FTDM>>>Gen.Raven wrote:
but with 40 unlocks ranks had to be easier to gain.
also, stats, i wouldn't care if they were gone. Though its interesting to have them there just so you know how much time you've wasted.
Just because some people play the game constantly and wear it out for themselves doesn't mean everyone does... Believe it or not, 170-200 hours of gameplay for $50 (or whatever you paid for it) is exceptional by today's standards.
Anyway, I probably wouldn't play as much without stats/rewards/unlocks. I love things like rewards that compel you to play more and earn more things for you to use in a game.
Last edited by BrknPhoenix (2007-01-25 13:10:19)
it's a fun game, but i enjoy checking my stats to see how well im doing.
I completely agree. I am up to about 200 hours of total playtime in a game that cost me $50. That means so far the game has cost me $0.25 an hour to play. When you're on a limited budget as I am, being able to cheaply entertain myself in my spare time (I consistently play a couple hours a night instead of watching endless amounts of television) is one of the things I look for when I buy a computer game.BrknPhoenix wrote:
Believe it or not, 170-200 hours of gameplay for $50 (or whatever you paid for it) is exceptional by today's standards.
Most typical FPS story-driven games only last between 5-15 hours, which means they cost anywhere from $3.33-$10 an hour to play. When videogames cost the same hourly rate as going to the movies, a bar, or bowling I can safely say I'd rather go out than stay inside and play a game.
My original point: Enjoy the Battlefield Series. Don't complain that the game's lifespan is too short because it isn't. If you want something that will consume you for 8-10 hours a day that isn't Battlefield related, try getting a job.
No. The stats system is why I love lots of these games. BF2, 2142, Company of Heroes...
It feels good to set goals, and then meeting them. I'll probably retire from 2142 once I get my WCR or 2000 tags. I retired from BF2 @ Colonel.
Unfortunatly for Ea/Dice, the playtime and replay value of 2142 is not nearly that of BF2. People lose interest, and now the play better/other games (CoH ftw!).
It feels good to set goals, and then meeting them. I'll probably retire from 2142 once I get my WCR or 2000 tags. I retired from BF2 @ Colonel.
Unfortunatly for Ea/Dice, the playtime and replay value of 2142 is not nearly that of BF2. People lose interest, and now the play better/other games (CoH ftw!).
Raping noobs is fun regardless. CAL FTW.SargeV1.4 wrote:
Would you still play without stats? imagine - no ranks, no stats, no ranked servers, just the actual game.
honestly?
or would you stop playing a lot earlier?
I dont play CS because theirs no Stats, I find it stupid to play a game that have no stats, its just like playing for nothing (for me) of course i played some CS just for fun some times but its not a game i can play everyday like BF2
Now that I think about it, people have also seemed to forget that stat tracking has been around for a long time. There used to be a website called www.theclq.com that tracked stats for almost all shooters from the late 90s until a couple years ago. Also, any decent server should have tracked stats for all players on their server. Whenever I played Day of Defeat I'd just frequent the same server so I always had a good idea how my K and such was doing (/brag Naturally I was #1 on the server for about a year).
I bring this up because I'd imagine many current FPS players are in their teens, which means they'd have never experienced old school stat tracking. BF2/BF2142 aren't original in this regard. Oh, and speaking of BF2142 not being original, it's the most blatent ripoff of another game I've ever seen. It's just a rebranded Planetside (the first MMOFPS). Planetside even had the same exact thing as titan mode, except the titans were called bases or forts or something and were on the ground. Despite being land based the premise was the same. You had to destroy 4 objectives (power generators instead of consoles) to ultimately capture/destroy the base. The visual and audio stylings, the unlock/rank system, and the battle types (especially with the addition of Assault Lines with NS) are straight up jacked from Planetside. Hell, even many of the guns feel the same.
That's probably why I like BF2142, it reminds me a lot of Planetside.
I bring this up because I'd imagine many current FPS players are in their teens, which means they'd have never experienced old school stat tracking. BF2/BF2142 aren't original in this regard. Oh, and speaking of BF2142 not being original, it's the most blatent ripoff of another game I've ever seen. It's just a rebranded Planetside (the first MMOFPS). Planetside even had the same exact thing as titan mode, except the titans were called bases or forts or something and were on the ground. Despite being land based the premise was the same. You had to destroy 4 objectives (power generators instead of consoles) to ultimately capture/destroy the base. The visual and audio stylings, the unlock/rank system, and the battle types (especially with the addition of Assault Lines with NS) are straight up jacked from Planetside. Hell, even many of the guns feel the same.
That's probably why I like BF2142, it reminds me a lot of Planetside.
Stats can stay, but they need to be changed from "e-penis" to something more subtle.
I say Ranks. Ranks only.
I say Ranks. Ranks only.