User comment history
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ] Older >
| News Comments > BF2 Stats Server Glitch |
 |
| 52. |
Re: Update on AT Missle issue |
Aug 11, 2005, 23:00 |
Jow |
|
|
The worst thing is inflicting two hits on a tank and actually managing to survive, only to have the dude who was inside (and an assault kit, for example) get out and take you out instantly. You do all that work and you basically got a death and nothing else out of it.
Moral of the story is that if you're a scoremonger, you generally don't want to play AT for extended periods of time. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > BF2 Stats Server Glitch |
|
| 32. |
Re: Yeah right |
Aug 11, 2005, 17:42 |
Jow |
|
|
Thoughts on Karkand.. I like it for some of the same reasons, specifically no chopper whoring and the vehicles are minimal so they don't dominate the map.
On the other hand, sometimes it feels like the game just degenerates into a huge clusterfawk where you die over and over in the meat grinder as you're going for points. Map gets a little old for me in that vein after a while.
Then again, it all comes down to squadplay and I gotta say it's pretty rare I actually get with a squad that stays together and fights as a unit (on that map or any other).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > BF2 Stats Server Glitch |
|
| 30. |
Re: LOL |
Aug 11, 2005, 17:39 |
Jow |
|
|
I was just telling a friend the other day that I wished the modern theater would have been done first, with 1942 getting the new engine/technology treatment, cus I really, REALLY miss the feel of WWII in this game... The fighters and big bombers, the naval combat... etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > BF2 Stats Server Glitch |
|
| 20. |
Re: LOL |
Aug 11, 2005, 16:54 |
Jow |
|
|
I'm here to tell ya, the rear is generally nowhere NEAR as vulnerable as it was in, say, BF1942. Generally it takes two AT rockets to seriously damage or kill a tank, though occasionally it will require three. Other vehicles sometimes take one, usually two before going down. I've not yet seen a vehicle take extra damage or go out instantly from a hit to the back from an AT rocket (which I've accomplished quite a few times, and this is after 100+ hours of playtime thus far. I've also never seen them seem to take extra damage from tank shots in the rear, either. Considering how many vehicles there are in the game and how difficult it is to survive as an infantryman on most maps, that sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > On BF2 Sales |
|
| 50. |
Re: All jokes aside |
Jul 27, 2005, 17:01 |
Jow |
|
|
Gotta agree on the flakiness of the sniper rifles. I still remember the time I snuck up behind someone and was within 15-20 feet of them max and somehow, despite being crouched (not prone) and zoomed in, I missed 4-5 times (with the M95) in a row. That he didn't spin around and confront me after the first shot was a miracle because he had to have heard the report, but after the last shot he finally realized I was there and we did the pistol dance. I ended up killing him with a grenade tossed onto the ground of front of me as I backpedaled, but with a supposedly high accuracy weapon missing that many times at such short range, something's strange.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Ships Ahoy - Battlefield 2 |
|
| 39. |
Re: Uh Oh |
Jun 21, 2005, 13:05 |
Jow |
|
|
>I'm probably jaded because I'm tired of it, but I'm >surprised to see it getting such high reviews. It seems >like no one is ever willing to fault the high-profile games >in major reviews.
See, this is an issue with game reviews in general. Review scores are predominantly based on how well a developer pulls off what they were attempting. Just because you don't necessarily still enjoy what BF2 brings to the table doesn't mean it deserves low reviews or to be faulted.
Hell, if reviews worked like you mention, every Age of Empires/Empire Earth/Rise of Nations whatever style RTS game that comes out from here on (including AoE 3) deserves to get panned miserably, cus personally I've always really disliked that style of RTS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Saturday Q&As |
|
| 7. |
Re: BF2 Buggy Release? |
Jun 19, 2005, 22:56 |
Jow |
|
|
The server browser has sucked badly since 1942. Just wait until the retail comes out and use All-Seeing Eye.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo |
|
| 106. |
Re: Servers are being pounded ... |
Jun 10, 2005, 17:23 |
Jow |
|
|
Again, in case anyone is playing this... Can you confirm that there's a 10 or 12 minute limit on each round?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo |
|
| 66. |
Re: That EA site IS working |
Jun 10, 2005, 16:50 |
Jow |
|
|
Squirrel: I clicked on the demo link you posted below and keep getting "550 No such directory". Something ain't right.
This comment was edited on Jun 10, 16:51. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo |
|
| 64. |
Re: That EA site IS working |
Jun 10, 2005, 16:49 |
Jow |
|
|
Having someone else check. I logged in with both an ftp client and manually through the browser (firefox) and both see the same thing, which is nothing.
Incidentally, in the next lower post about the demo coming out someone mentioned you can only play on the map in the demo for 10 minutes... This true?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo |
|
| 44. |
Re: That EA site IS working |
Jun 10, 2005, 16:36 |
Jow |
|
|
maddog, i've been connected to the ftp (largedownloads.ea.com) for the last 10 minutes and don't see anything even resembling the BF2 demo. What are you snagging?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo |
|
| 17. |
Re: Video card question |
Jun 10, 2005, 16:21 |
Jow |
|
|
Well, it's not just for the demo... obviously I'd need it for the full game too. 'sjust that gaming has been extra slow for me for most of this year and now that something I'm actually interested in is coming out... the idea that I can't play it cus it won't run on my card is completely unacceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo |
|
| 14. |
Video card question |
Jun 10, 2005, 16:17 |
Jow |
|
|
I know no one's played it yet, but can anyone confirm or deny that I will or won't be able to run this thing with my old Geforce 4 ti4400? I've seen listings of the supported cards and know that you need pixel shaders 1.4 to run this, but is it gonna prevent me from running it altogether or just make it not look as good?
I ask this because I'm prepared to run somewhere retail and snag a new card at this point if that's what it takes to play. Just need to know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Demo Plans |
|
| 36. |
Re: No subject |
Jun 2, 2005, 17:33 |
Jow |
|
|
1942 and Vietnam (the last in particular) to me were examples of games that evolved before the technology was ripe enough to do them justice. The whole virtual battlefield concept is something I've dreamt of for a long time and seeing the first serious attempts at this was both rewarding and extremely frustrating.
I still wonder if it's possible to develop engine technology that's capable of doing this type of game justice (consistently fluid, near lag-free gameplay) with the hardware we have out now. I'm hoping that if that IS a reachable goal, that we can dismiss what happened with BF1942 and Vietnam as "courageous" first efforts at this type of game and that the engine in BF2 is gonna be killer. Boy do I hope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| News Comments > Battlefield 2 Movie |
|
| 21. |
Re: bout ... to ....explODE !! |
Jun 1, 2005, 13:42 |
Jow |
|
|
Learned their lesson? Both 1942 and Vietnam sold tons of copies despite the bugginess of both games on release. What kinda lesson does that teach them? "Wow, we can toss this stuff out unfinished it and people will still slobber all over it."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
353 Comments. 18 pages. Viewing page 16.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ] Older > |
|
Twitter 
