Paranoid rantings! -1 reply

Please wait...

BigWyrrm

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

24th July 2005

0 Uploads

12 Posts

0 Threads

#1 13 years ago

Ok, does anyone who plays BF2 actually like the server browser? I think it is horrible. It still lags, has filters (like not full) that don't work, and there is no friends list, last played list, or even favorites list. The worst thing about it is that it was made by Lamespy, who has a pretty decent server browser on their site. You would think that they would make a browser that is as good, if not better, than the standard one available on Lamespy. But noooooo. They produce a laggy piece of crap with very few features that needs patching the second it is in the hands of users. They should be embarrassed about such a poor product. By the way, has anyone noticed that Lamespy's review of BF2 is a perfect 5 out of 5? They normally give out perfect scores very rarely (as it should be). http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/battlefield-2/626911p1.html With all of the bugs and problems people are having, they gave it a perfect rating. What the hell? It wouldn't have anything to do with their new partnership with EA (I.E. making the browser for BF2) would it? No, they wouldn't do something as unethical and lame as that. Just like they wouldn't change a review rating that an in-house reviewer gave a certain Nintendo game. They wouldn't bump up the review score to kiss Nintendo's ass would they? And it doesn't have anything to do with Lamespy's new partnership with Nintendo to supply the network for the DS online community, does it? Food for thought.




OneTinSoldier

Circular Error ProbabilityZero

50 XP

24th October 2004

0 Uploads

465 Posts

0 Threads

#2 13 years ago

The server browser does not lag for me with the 1.02 update. Friends list? Personally, I don't expect that in the server browser. However, I do expect a favorites list, which is supposed to be included in the next update according to the annoucement by EA. /rant ON I do agree that you would think they could have done a considerably better job on the in-game browser, especially seeing how they were supplied with everything they needed to do a good job on it, by Gamespy. I am starting to learn my lesson about reviews. Gamespy, and my favorite magazine, Maximum PC, gave a great rating for the game Silent Hunter III. And it is a great game. But there is something they don't tell you. That the game has a number of bugs!! Small bugs, but nevertheless there are some annoying ones, small or not. They don't even mention that at all. Not a word. And these annoying bugs weren't fixed, even after 4 patches. Bah. I'm not ticked that I bought Silent Hunter III based on reviews, but I would have liked to have known about the bugs and that's one thing I thought reviews were supposed to cover. For the most part, in the future I will be waiting to purchase games until they have been out for a while, regardless of the first reviews that hit the street. That way I can read the forums about all the bugs it has before deciding whether or not to get it. I suppose that's really nothing new in this day and age of '85% of games have to be patched' because a 'has gone Gold' status really isn't a final release but is instead a 'ok, we got 75% of the feature set working without crashing on our test systems'. :lol: And it has become obvious I can't rely on reviews from some of my favorite sources anymore to cover some of the areas I'm concerned about. It almost seems more and more that we consumers are fully expected to expect buggy releases, but even game reviewers are now starting to turn a blind eye when it comes to reporting bugs in their reviews. Obviously I'm talking in general here and not specifically about BF2. But if I were, how about the fact that not one review I've seen mentions an inexcusable bug in a game such as this(imo), the bug where a friendly shows as red in color and so you shoot him and you are punished for a TK. Are reviewers blind? How could you miss this? Do they only play the game for 15 minutes before writing their review? Perhaps I should become a game reviewer. ;-) Ok, perhaps I'm being a little harsh, because not long ago I even made a post that I had not seen this bug for over ten days and wondered if it had been fixed. Still, I would think that I would have seen this bug mentioned in at least one freakin' review. And no, the bug has not been fixed yet, it remains in patch 1.02. If someone knows of a review that points out this bug please give me a link. My personal opinion of BF2 is high though. Because the game has worked fine for me since the day it was released. I can play it pretty much all day long with no problem. Yes the server browser was bad in the initial release, to a nearly inexcusable point. It was improved in the first patch and is supposed to be receiving further improvemment. There are bugs with the game that need fixing. But there is only a few that are incredibly annoying. Such as a friendly that shows as red in color! Still overall, I think BF2 is a great game. What did you expect an EA partner to do? Dis EA and give the game a 2 or 3 out of 5 rating? Hehe. Upon reading the review I think they were fairly objective and they do point out some of their 'nitpicks'. Such as Sniper rifle and Single player mode deficiencies, the fact that the game has 'steep system requirements' and a few others. So, it is good that they point these type of things out even while giving it a perfect 5 out of 5 rating. Interesting that they didn't point out that the 'Powered by Gamespy Server Browser' has a crappy EA implementation in the initial release though. I think they should have given EA some grief about that in the review to show their disappointment and let them know that thier, partner, would be making they them(Gamespy), as well as themselves(EA), look bad out of the gate in regards to the server browser. EA used Gamespy for the server browser in BF1942 and BF:V. There is absolutely no excuse for such a crappy implementation of the Gamespy Browser in the initial release of BF2. Three years after the original BF1942!! That made Gamespy look bad and I think they should have mentioned that in their review. Kind of like when Captain Solo sarcastically asks Lando, "What's up??... buddy" in Star Wars: Return of the Jedi. /rant OFF I will end my post by saying, the server browser is not what the game is all about though. Regards, OneTinSoldier




apocalypse_kid

I would die without GF

50 XP

20th May 2002

0 Uploads

5,498 Posts

0 Threads

#3 13 years ago

Personally I feel that the game browsers in all BF versions have NEVER been up to scratch, and it's about time they sorted it! I can live with it, and as long as ASE will work with it I can ignore it just like may others will do.

AK

:smokin:




OneTinSoldier

Circular Error ProbabilityZero

50 XP

24th October 2004

0 Uploads

465 Posts

0 Threads

#4 13 years ago

Hehe AK, I hear ya man.




FactionRecon

11PzG Grunt

50 XP

4th August 2003

0 Uploads

3,889 Posts

0 Threads

#5 13 years ago

Just remember TinSoldier: money talks. A lot. EA most likely paid off Gamespy and other big reviewing companies like IGN and Gamespot to make sure not to point out a lot of the negatives while still making it so the game didn't sound perfect either ;)

Aah, the honesty in business these days enthralls me.




paulzeromi

Tech Support Lackey

50 XP

17th July 2005

0 Uploads

62 Posts

0 Threads

#6 13 years ago

??? I can't belive that EA would actually bribe a reviewer to drum up their game.... Sure, maybe some reviewerd wanted to suck up, but be bribed? I think not




BigWyrrm

I'm too cool to Post

50 XP

24th July 2005

0 Uploads

12 Posts

0 Threads

#7 13 years ago

I think that it is much less of a 'bribe' and more of a 'good relations move' so that Lamespy will be included in future EA projects. Anyone who has played BF2 KNOWS that it doesn't deserve 5 out of 5 stars. Don't get me wrong, it is a fun game, but far from perfect, or even exceptional (at least in it's current state). Same goes for their relations with Nintendo. Lamespy wants to avoid the stress of signing a deal with a company and then immediately give one of their games a bad review. While it may be completely unethical, it does smooth relations. FYI, the game was Donkey Konga 2. A few months ago a reviewer submitted an average review of the title and it was bumped up by the editor by at least 1/2 star. That doesn't sound like much, but a 3 1/2 star game sounds way better than 3 stars. If you read the review, it doesn't seem to match the score. http://cube.gamespy.com/gamecube/donkey-konga-disk-2/621786p1.html Then at E3, Nintendo announced during their press conference that the company creating and supporting their new online DS network is none other than....Gamespy! Maybe I am just a paranoid cynic or maybe I am on the money. It doesn't really matter because the gaming world will always be run by the almighty dollar.




DemonicBadger

Heresy grows from idleness...

50 XP

10th January 2005

0 Uploads

75 Posts

0 Threads

#8 13 years ago

Yes, such is the corrupt ploys of corporate america...




andrewizcool05

puff..puff..shoot

50 XP

10th July 2005

0 Uploads

68 Posts

0 Threads

#9 13 years ago

we need to rise up and crush the corrupt government in which we leave. viva la revoultion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! rise up and.. uhh...ahhhhhh