BF2S Forums EE Chats 2142

the underlying assumptions behind matchmaking for everything are just dumb. it’s like a console-based infrastructure that colonised the pc platform. that and obviously games producers and their publishers wanted to stop ceding hosting rights and control to third parties (money or anticheat? i’m guessing both).

but it seems to assume that every gamer wants to be on a permanent ELO treadmill, trying to grind out skill points and always become better. or that it’s necessarily a bad thing when a game - especially one with gigantic teams like BF - has a spread of very good players/squads and not so good ones. i can see why that might matter in a 5-person game like LoL where every game involves throwing away an hour of your life and a single player can throw the whole thing. but a 64v64 capture point FPS? it’s just more fun when you have n00bs and 1337ors in the same server.

it also destroys the like ‘horizontal’ aspect of games socialisation. finding servers in your local area (lowest ping). becoming someone in your local or national scene because you frequent the most reputed servers, etc. even making new friendships and clans as a result. how the fuck do you meet other local people playing the same game as you in a matchmaking setup? again to borrow from MMOs, its like when raid finder replaced the need to actually join and maintain healthy guilds within your server community. why bother when you can just be automatically placed in a queue to instantly jump into a dungeon or raid? it’s streamlined but totally confounds all the social aspects of gaming.

Last edited by uziq (2025-08-05 09:45:33)

Speaking of community...if this game isn't terrible, by some miracle, we should setup a play date.

We can all use [bf2s] tags like the old days.
Sorry to interrupt but I just wanted to correct something in the post.

Battlefield apparently has not had clan tags for a long time.
https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0249/ … 1639507577
Maybe we could even get the children of KIMMY and Chuy to hop on. They should be old enough now. Ack!

_{In all seriousness the changing of generations can often be bittersweet when you watch it up close. Some students I had since freshman year were launched into adulthood in June. God help them! What an experience. The freshmen I had last year are soon coming back from what I promised them would be "the best summer of your life." It will be interesting to see how they changed as people.}

no clan tags? that’s just sad. it was so fun to see a bunch of your mates dominating a leaderboard with the same prefixes or team logos.

it's quite fun. more mw than bf2, but still has that core battlefield feels. bit too fast paced for my liking by like 20% and the games don't last long enough overall but i'm enjoying it so far.

the games are designed with streamers in mind now. vintage BF games weren't 'cinematic' enough for killstreak clips. CoD cornered that part of the market for the longest time (360 no scope!!!)

all the clips i've seen of BF6 seem basically indistinguishable from CoD clips, except it has that 'frostbite engine' veneer and shine to all the lighting effects. enter narrow urban choke-point or jump off ledge, scope, and hold your red dot over 7 enemies while you melt them with seemingly zero recoil or spray. that's not BF imo. anything up to medium-long range was controlled hip shooting. even dolphin diving was at least unique and played to the game/engine's strengths. what's the fun of all this sprinting around and aiming down sight at people? call of duty already exists.

Last edited by uziq (2025-08-08 20:38:18)

Yea battlefield didn't exist before Bad Company 2 for a lot of people and BF2 means Battlefront II 2017 nowadays. A shame, never played a pvp shooter as much as 2.

Last edited by RTHKI (2025-08-09 07:04:45)

i had the same experience with call of duty. for most people, the series begins at cod4 (the first modern warfare). whereas, for me, it was cod1 (vCod) and cod2. those games just don't exist anymore for most people, despite being the highlight of the series in terms of gameplay and skill curve.

it is kind of wild how old bf2 is now. it was pre-quad core processors. 64-bit AMD was the bees knees back then. just wild.

Last edited by uziq (2025-08-09 23:39:59)

uziq wrote:

i had the same experience with call of duty. for most people, the series begins at cod4 (the first modern warfare). whereas, for me, it was cod1 (vCod) and cod2. those games just don't exist anymore for most people, despite being the highlight of the series in terms of gameplay and skill curve.

it is kind of wild how old bf2 is now. it was pre-quad core processors. 64-bit AMD was the bees knees back then. just wild.

Whats wild is how people can just buy games, I had to write them myself or type them in from a magazine.

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

i had the same experience with call of duty. for most people, the series begins at cod4 (the first modern warfare). whereas, for me, it was cod1 (vCod) and cod2. those games just don't exist anymore for most people, despite being the highlight of the series in terms of gameplay and skill curve.

it is kind of wild how old bf2 is now. it was pre-quad core processors. 64-bit AMD was the bees knees back then. just wild.

Whats wild is how people can just buy games, I had to write them myself or type them in from a magazine.

ha ha.

i did have a machine when i was a pre-teen that booted games from a floppy drive.  i can remember the noises still. amiga probably.

some of those games were incredibly DIY. some of them were frankly smutty. a weird era in gaming's infancy.

uziq wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

I remember wanting an Intel E8400 back when my main PC was a Pentium D. I also remember the arguments about whether a Q6600 was good for gaming or not. I bet I just dropped some terms that you haven't thought of in a while.

yep Q6600 was my first quad-core machine, and it was very noticeable on 64-player maps on bf2. the extra CPU power really made the difference.

The Q6600 makes no difference in Battlefield 2. BF2 only uses 2 cores.

Just kidding. I remember those debates. I didn't have a stake in it.

It was all good compared to reading a book, playing a sport or whatever people could do before cellphones took over our lives. If you take away the cellphones then you basically shrink everything back to the sort of community we had in the past.


...

It is underappreciated how Steam and Microsoft have successfully done away with system crashing errors or install issues. When was the last time you saw a BSOD or had a system lock up? Computer viruses too. People don't make computer viruses for the love of the game anymore.

SuperJail Warden wrote:

It was all good compared to reading a book, playing a sport or whatever people could do before cellphones took over our lives. If you take away the cellphones then you basically shrink everything back to the sort of community we had in the past.


...

It is underappreciated how Steam and Microsoft have successfully done away with system crashing errors or install issues. When was the last time you saw a BSOD or had a system lock up? Computer viruses too. People don't make computer viruses for the love of the game anymore.

the flipside of this is that you don't really 'own' your games anymore. you need a web connection and a sometimes bloated and performance-draining piece of 'launcher' software in the background. how many shitty launchers have you dealt with in your time? blizzard? EA games? steam? windows games? at one point i recall having literally 4-5 of these things open simultaneously, often booting at launch. each with its own friends list, advertising pop-ups, store, library ... oh and let's not forget their intrusive, streaming-inspired clipping or video recording options. either the steam in-game overlay or some other piece of random publisher bloatware would frequently corpse my AMD card and fuck with its video drivers when i'm in game, trying to insert it's own 'press f12 to save that last frag as a clip!' option.

really says something for the days of just installing all your games to your fastest hard-drive and having 10 .exe shortcuts on your desktop.

Last edited by uziq (2025-08-11 22:48:15)

SuperJail Warden wrote:

You finally admit your AMD card gave you driver issues. think you criticized me going with Nvidia. I quit AMD cards over driver issues. This was a recent one or an Radeon HD 4870 from the memory vault?

lmaooo. i am talking about an entirely previous generation of card in an entirely different machine.

that machine i bought during covid actually died a death because i went to asia. the first time i was home, 1.75 years later or something, i went to turn it on and the PSU catastrophically failed. couldn't be bothered to pay $250 to replace it, just for the short while i was home. and now at this point that machine is like, what? 4-5 years old? may as well build an entirely new machine. lord knows it won't manage with all the ray-tracing and AI-enhanced game engines they're throwing down consoomers throats now.

all of my macbooks have safely lived to 4-5 years old with continual daily use. building PCs and having oodles of performance for a great price has its perks and all, but continual troubleshooting and shit breaking without a manufacturer warranty on the level of AppleCare's really does get old ("oh, sorry, this PSU manufacturer is based in taiwan and only offer 7.5 months warranty").

btw the real golden era of owning games was when Valve games came in gigantic cardbox boxes. or literal metal tins (the orange box). i am not talking about those ugly 'microplastics in my balls' console stands. i got half-life: blue shift as an xmas present when i was about 12 years old, and that game came in a fucking presentation box.



which is just as well ... gave you something to look at while your computer took 40 minutes to install it.

Last edited by uziq (2025-08-11 23:53:32)