BF2 Bends Over For EA Again...

Guru Imakuni · 02-18-2005, 09:45 PM

It was mentioned on the frontpage that only official servers will allow the progression of ranks. You can rent official servers from EA. Now EA holds the monopoly on one aspect of the game - rank progression. They claim that they couldn't protect people from sending false data to the databases.

All they had to do is force content checking "on" for servers that wished to be ranked. The rank upload part of the client is checked for any filesize and checksum inaccuracies. Not much of a problem... Now you tell me even if the ranks could be hacked, would you rather have a few ranking servers or a plethora of servers with the occasional player with stacked stats?

It's obviously a business ploy. I wish people would boycott EA but they're just too big to. Their working conditions suck and they always fuck up every game they put out somehow.

http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbat...4&p=2#18058535

Mad Monk · 02-18-2005, 09:59 PM

grim reaper · 02-18-2005, 10:03 PM

Yes, EA suck. But they occasioanally put out good games. Such as BF.

NavalLord · 02-18-2005, 10:25 PM

Quote:

I apologize if my original email to Boomtown was not clear on ranks/unlocks/stats/Awards. If you put up a server you will still have access to ranks/unlocks/stats. So you can run around as a Sgt., use your unlocked weapons, and see your stats. This is an option that is open to the server admin and it is up to them.

What you cannot do is have stats collected from that server. What you do there will not count towards gaining rank, etc. The reason for this was pretty well covered in the email. Someone mentioned PunkBuster as a solution. Unfortunately PB is not, as it designed for stopping cheating in game, not stopping someone from sending false data from a server to the database.

As for the idea that the purpose behind this is not to provide a secure environment and level playing field for people to play on, but instead that EA is looking to get more money, I can only say that it is not true.

The reason we offered to open rental servers to ranked games was because it allowed people to set up their own servers and have the stats count for ranks/unlocks/awards. If you really just want to play the Strike at Karkand level and want a server that plays it over and over, then you can set that up and have the stats count.
Finally, the cost to EA and it's partners for hosting the ranked servers is a very large sum every month. Why would we take on this cost? Because we believe that the Stats/Ranks/Unlocks/Awards is a very cool and fun system that BF fans will enjoy, but only if they can be assured that it shows true stats.

If people who were ranked as the best players in the world were those who simply hacked their game server and sent false data, would anyone want to compete? Why play a game if it's rigged?

If you compare the Ranked system we are building, it is very similar to an MMO, without the $10/month fee. No MMO in the world (that I know of) allows the public to host a server and send data to the backend. Why? Security.

I hope that clears up our intentions and why we are taking this path. If we find a way to have the public host ranked servers securely, we will do so.

http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbat...4&p=2#18058535

Caslon · 02-19-2005, 08:10 AM

Apparently, a lot of ppl are concerned with the way BF2 will be structured
server wise.
Character advancement in non-EA servers.

Get's more involved every day. I'm sorta confused so far.

http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbat...id=1601933&p=1

Guru Imakuni · 02-19-2005, 04:00 PM

That thread sums it up perfectly, Caslon. Right from the second post you can see what's going on.

If I ever made a game and EA approched me I'd go to their meeting, eat their food, and tell them to fuck off unless I can retain 100% of the development and production of my games. In essence the only thing they could get from me is me to put their logo on the box - no annoying EA intro and no stupid features dictated by EA.

Mad Monk · 02-19-2005, 06:35 PM

[quote="NavalLord"]

Quote:

I apologize if my original email to Boomtown was not clear on ranks/unlocks/stats/Awards. If you put up a server you will still have access to ranks/unlocks/stats. So you can run around as a Sgt., use your unlocked weapons, and see your stats. This is an option that is open to the server admin and it is up to them.

What you cannot do is have stats collected from that server. What you do there will not count towards gaining rank, etc

So, let me make sure I understand this. In order for me to gain rank and unlock kits/weapons/whatever I MUST play on EA or EA-rented servers? If I never set digital foot in an EA server I'll be relegated to playing with the basic kits that you start out with?

If I do play EA servers and gain rank (and everything that comes with it) there, I can have that rank elsewhere, but EA servers are the only place that I will be able to gain rank?

Am I understanding this correctly?

If so, EA has just lost my gaming dollars on this game.

NavalLord · 02-19-2005, 08:43 PM

[quote="Mad Monk"]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NavalLord

Quote:

I apologize if my original email to Boomtown was not clear on ranks/unlocks/stats/Awards. If you put up a server you will still have access to ranks/unlocks/stats. So you can run around as a Sgt., use your unlocked weapons, and see your stats. This is an option that is open to the server admin and it is up to them.

What you cannot do is have stats collected from that server. What you do there will not count towards gaining rank, etc

So, let me make sure I understand this. In order for me to gain rank and unlock kits/weapons/whatever I MUST play on EA or EA-rented servers? If I never set digital foot in an EA server I'll be relegated to playing with the basic kits that you start out with?

If I do play EA servers and gain rank (and everything that comes with it) there, I can have that rank elsewhere, but EA servers are the only place that I will be able to gain rank?

Am I understanding this correctly?

If so, EA has just lost my gaming dollars on this game.

yes you are correct, but for anyone who has played MoH:PA they knw that pretty much all servers have the "rank up" enabled, so you can always find a good server, i doubt very much we will be forced to play on the EA servers that we know from BF42

Fishfinger · 02-20-2005, 12:21 AM

MOHPA is complete load of shite
Thats what happens when EA get hold of stuff
The good people left and made COD

DanTesla1 · 02-20-2005, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fishfinger

MOHPA is complete load of shite
Thats what happens when EA get hold of stuff
The good people left and made COD

The extra stuff in the Director's Edition is great. I can't get past the 1st level..... and i'm tired of bootcamp.

NavalLord · 02-20-2005, 04:02 AM

its true the Multiplayer of PA wasnt great, it lagged like hell, when you got on a mounted mg your FPS went to 1
single player was good though, first level was easy

Guru Imakuni · 02-20-2005, 04:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NavalLord

yes you are correct, but for anyone who has played MoH:PA they knw that pretty much all servers have the "rank up" enabled, so you can always find a good server, i doubt very much we will be forced to play on the EA servers that we know from BF42

MoH:PA has nothing to do with this other than the fact that EA produced them both. How will BF2's EA servers get any better when compared to BF192's EA servers? If anything it will get worse now that 90% of players are going to use them the majority of the time - all for weapons that won't profoundly impact gameplay. I can't wait for people to realize a year after release that they spent all that time on EA's servers in vain.

UT2k3 and UT2k4 have a rank feature implemented too. For a game that thrives on scores you'd think most would track stats...

NavalLord · 02-20-2005, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guru Imakuni

Quote:

Originally Posted by NavalLord

yes you are correct, but for anyone who has played MoH:PA they knw that pretty much all servers have the "rank up" enabled, so you can always find a good server, i doubt very much we will be forced to play on the EA servers that we know from BF42

MoH:PA has nothing to do with this other than the fact that EA produced them both. How will BF2's EA servers get any better when compared to BF192's EA servers? If anything it will get worse now that 90% of players are going to use them the majority of the time - all for weapons that won't profoundly impact gameplay. I can't wait for people to realize a year after release that they spent all that time on EA's servers in vain.

UT2k3 and UT2k4 have a rank feature implemented too. For a game that thrives on scores you'd think most would track stats...

MoH:PA is related to BF2 because its multiplayer is using exactly the same formula as BF2, the ranking system, classes, they are exactly the same

Guru Imakuni · 02-20-2005, 04:52 AM

That still has nothing to do with EA's business scheme for BF2.

Random Ping · 02-21-2005, 02:38 AM

Completely agree about COD, Fish.

This whole ranking system seems like just another way for EA to subtly get money and control every aspect of their games. Instead of letting fans enjoy EA games as they please, EA wants to control the gameplay, make it linear. This focus may be good for games like MOH, but BF is different. BF thrives on the fact that the gameplay is random and spontaneous. By controlling the ranking system, I think they are really taking away the fun and excitement alot of fans of BF have come to love about the series.

02-18-2005, 09:45 PM	#1 (permalink)
Guru Imakuni Captain Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 2,309	BF2 Bends Over For EA Again... It was mentioned on the frontpage that only official servers will allow the progression of ranks. You can rent official servers from EA. Now EA holds the monopoly on one aspect of the game - rank progression. They claim that they couldn't protect people from sending false data to the databases. All they had to do is force content checking "on" for servers that wished to be ranked. The rank upload part of the client is checked for any filesize and checksum inaccuracies. Not much of a problem... Now you tell me even if the ranks could be hacked, would you rather have a few ranking servers or a plethora of servers with the occasional player with stacked stats? It's obviously a business ploy. I wish people would boycott EA but they're just too big to. Their working conditions suck and they always fuck up every game they put out somehow. http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbat...4&p=2#18058535 __________________

02-18-2005, 09:59 PM	#2 (permalink)
Mad Monk Major Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: O-O-O-O-Oklahoma, where the wind comes sweeping down the plain. Posts: 3,045	__________________

02-19-2005, 04:00 PM	#6 (permalink)
Guru Imakuni Captain Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 2,309	That thread sums it up perfectly, Caslon. Right from the second post you can see what's going on. If I ever made a game and EA approched me I'd go to their meeting, eat their food, and tell them to fuck off unless I can retain 100% of the development and production of my games. In essence the only thing they could get from me is me to put their logo on the box - no annoying EA intro and no stupid features dictated by EA. __________________

02-20-2005, 12:21 AM	#9 (permalink)
Fishfinger Major Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: The Shire of Wilts Posts: 3,508	MOHPA is complete load of shite Thats what happens when EA get hold of stuff The good people left and made COD __________________ Your message here My Stats

02-20-2005, 04:02 AM	#11 (permalink)
NavalLord Forum Moderator Brigadier General Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 6,149	its true the Multiplayer of PA wasnt great, it lagged like hell, when you got on a mounted mg your FPS went to 1 single player was good though, first level was easy __________________

02-18-2005, 10:03 PM	#3 (permalink)
grim reaper Forum Moderator Brigadier General Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: England Posts: 7,256	Yes, EA suck. But they occasioanally put out good games. Such as BF.

02-19-2005, 08:10 AM	#5 (permalink)
Caslon Lieutenant Colonel Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Deep inside the Earth. Posts: 4,850	Apparently, a lot of ppl are concerned with the way BF2 will be structured server wise. Character advancement in non-EA servers. Get's more involved every day. I'm sorta confused so far. http://www.forumplanet.com/planetbat...id=1601933&p=1

02-20-2005, 04:52 AM	#14 (permalink)
Guru Imakuni Captain Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 2,309	That still has nothing to do with EA's business scheme for BF2. __________________

02-21-2005, 02:38 AM	#15 (permalink)
Random Ping Second Lieutenant Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Evergreen State (at least on the West coast) Posts: 1,304	Completely agree about COD, Fish. This whole ranking system seems like just another way for EA to subtly get money and control every aspect of their games. Instead of letting fans enjoy EA games as they please, EA wants to control the gameplay, make it linear. This focus may be good for games like MOH, but BF is different. BF thrives on the fact that the gameplay is random and spontaneous. By controlling the ranking system, I think they are really taking away the fun and excitement alot of fans of BF have come to love about the series. __________________ It is not important that the glass is half-full or half-empty, but rather how the glass got that way.