BF1942 Patch Update

The Battlefield 1942 Website (thanks Frans) has word on the upcoming version 1.6 patch. Here's the update. which is accompanied by screenshots of the two new maps:
Attention Soldiers! We're going to talk about a couple of things in todays update. First the upcoming 1.6 patch and then the Battlefield 1942 Map Making Contest. So without further ado...

1.6 Update Battlefield Command has busted butts to get the 1.6 patch done as quickly as possible. Our sincere hope was to release it before the December holidays. Unfortunately, our commitment to releasing clean patches means that we cannot release the patch in its current state. We still need some time to clear up a few glitches. So, you at least have something to look forward to in January when you've finished playing with all the toys and goodies you've received over the holidays!

Here's a short-list of some of the features you can look forward to:

  1. Punkbuster support
  2. New in-game GUI for map and kick-voting
  3. New game server allows hosting of different mods, maps and modes in the same server rotation
  4. Chat lag fixed
  5. Russian Ilyyushin IL-2 added to Kursk and Kharkov
  6. New Battlefield 1942 map
  7. New Battlefield 1942: Secret Weapons of WWII map
View : : :
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older
31.
 
Re: WTF?
Dec 20, 2003, 21:51
31.
Re: WTF? Dec 20, 2003, 21:51
Dec 20, 2003, 21:51
 
Odd then that CoD was developed by the same developers that did MOH:AA where cheating was also rampant (and got worse when EA started doing the expansions in house).

You don't need cheats to ruin someone's game. You just need to grief your teammates. In my opinion it's a lot worse being cut down by a teammate and having them repeatedly log back into the server after they've been kicked, than it is to have someone playing with a wall hack (which can be done with certain video drivers and MSN Messenger in any OpenGL game, btw, PB or no PB). There is even a hack that eliminated the effects of the Gas grenades and flashbangs in Raven Shield that PB still hasn't caught (yet the company reps is the forums will spew "there is no hack we can't catch"). I'll reiterate, PB stops retards from "cheating" but it doesn't do much to stop the dedicated cheater/hacker. All it's gonna do is boot all the Nvidia users from the BF1942. Ironic considering that EA is the "Way It's Meant To Be Played" ass kissing publisher.

30.
 
Boohoo Lag
Dec 20, 2003, 19:49
30.
Boohoo Lag Dec 20, 2003, 19:49
Dec 20, 2003, 19:49
 
Maybe a faster internet connection and joining a server with less than 30 people on it will be better for your hit detection. Also if you shoot a tank in the rear on an angle it doesn't take as much damage off as it would when it's straight on.

------------
Love,
Mayor Danm{
ExcessDan
29.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 20, 2003, 17:27
29.
Re: No subject Dec 20, 2003, 17:27
Dec 20, 2003, 17:27
 
I love how everyone ignored the Nvidia drivers + Punkbuster locks your computer up posts.

I took notice... but I don't know anything about it so...

Anyway, last time we discussed the BF1942 incorporation of PB it seemed as though the general consensus was PB would be a welcomed addition to BF1942.

How soon things change...

http://www.bluesnews.com/cgi-bin/board.pl?action=viewthread&threadid=45708


the best part about life is knowing you put it together
28.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 20, 2003, 15:06
Jow
28.
Re: No subject Dec 20, 2003, 15:06
Dec 20, 2003, 15:06
Jow
 
If it happens when PB is incorporated then I won't be ignoring 'em.

As for Tribes 2, honestly I think it was the learning curve... and Tribes 2 was a LOT easier to pick up than Tribes 1. T2, I thought, was a great game with a great engine and I was kinda disappointed it didn't last. Whether BF or T2 was buggier... honestly, at this point I don't know. BF still stands as one of the buggiest games I've ever played.

27.
 
No subject
Dec 20, 2003, 14:48
27.
No subject Dec 20, 2003, 14:48
Dec 20, 2003, 14:48
 
I love how everyone ignored the Nvidia drivers + Punkbuster locks your computer up posts.
Im Soupkin.
I hope i dont have aids.
http://users.ign.com/collection/Serious_Soup)
s{Postal 2 sucks.
26.
 
Re: WTF?
Dec 20, 2003, 11:21
26.
Re: WTF? Dec 20, 2003, 11:21
Dec 20, 2003, 11:21
 
Overnight it was like ET lost a huge chunk of it's playerbase.

They did! And I found them for ya'. There playing CoD where cheating is not only rampant but practically encouraged. Everything from aimbots and view hacks to the ability to maniputlate server side settings such as FF or FF reflective. It's a terrible feeling getting TK'ed on an FF reflective server when reflective is only protecting the TKer. I'll take PB any day versus the crap that's going on now. At least it eliminates all the kids with the widely circulated hacks. For the elite hackers... there's just not enough of them to spoil half the servers around.

This comment was edited on Dec 20, 11:25.
25.
 
...
Dec 20, 2003, 10:17
25.
... Dec 20, 2003, 10:17
Dec 20, 2003, 10:17
 
I really dig BF1942. Currently it is the only MP game I am playing. Some of the bugs have been really bad but I am able to look past them. However, BF1942 was/is just as buggy as Tribes2, and yet it is more of a "commercial success" than Tribes2 ever was. I have had more issues with BF than I ever did with Tribes2. I don't get it... Tribes2 is/was a great game. Now I am lucky if I find a populated Tribes2 server that has a decent game going. Which is pretty much my main reason for moving over to BF1942.

All of that makes me wonder if it were the bugs that hindered Tribes2 from being a success? (Like everyone says.) Or if it was really because of the steep learning curve?


...

the best part about life is knowing you put it together
24.
 
Re: laggg!
Dec 20, 2003, 09:20
Jow
24.
Re: laggg! Dec 20, 2003, 09:20
Dec 20, 2003, 09:20
Jow
 
The money from sales of this product is paying the people that are developing, testing, and shipping these patches. They're not doing us any "favors" by fixing things that are broken in the game, much less things that have been broken for a long time (like chat lag).

For what it's worth, I actually don't play the game anymore - got frustrated with how much stuff is still "broken" despite the fact that we're over a year after release. Ungrateful? Maybe, only cus it's too little too late as far as I'm concerned. :>

23.
 
Re: laggg!
Dec 20, 2003, 08:50
Rigs
 
23.
Re: laggg! Dec 20, 2003, 08:50
Dec 20, 2003, 08:50
 Rigs
 
I think my eyes just crossed....AHHH, THEY DID!!! OMG, MAKE IT STOP!!!!

You know, two times in one week is kind of outrageous...

Why do you peeps bitch so much? I don't get it. They finally fix the chat lag bug, and what do I hear? 'Well, it took them long enough!'...ok, at least they did it you ungrateful twit...geez...go play and shut up already!

Oh, and go get Desert Combat 1.6 or something(?)...yes, I was paid to say that...


=-Rigs-=

'I wanna heal, I wanna feel like I’m close to something real. I wanna find something I’ve wanted all along...Somewhere I belong...'
Dec 10th, '21 Mayfield EF4 tornado survivor
'Sorry, we thought you were dead.'
'I was. I'm better now.'
Avatar 14292
22.
 
Re: laggg!
Dec 20, 2003, 08:12
Jow
22.
Re: laggg! Dec 20, 2003, 08:12
Dec 20, 2003, 08:12
Jow
 
Interesting that sniper fire travels faster. Wouldn't have guessed, but despite the crazy network performance from time to time I'm still pretty consistently able to snipe people on the move from long distances.

All the people that have said the client-side hit effects are annoying are right on, though. It totally destroys suspension of disbelief for me to be in a dogfight and hosing a plane, watching pieces fly knowing he's taking no damage... or to pop a tank and hear the loud bang of the tank shell hitting but know it didn't do jack. I'd rather have no client side effects at all (although the best thing that's happened to this game is the hit indicator - keep it in Vietnam!).

21.
 
laggg!
Dec 20, 2003, 06:40
21.
laggg! Dec 20, 2003, 06:40
Dec 20, 2003, 06:40
 
Wont read all the long posts, but heres a quick run down of how bf's bullets works..

You shoot. The Bullet travels at a set velocity, the snipers in bf fire at about 2000m/s, normal guns about 800, so shooting distances do make a big impact to the lead time. Then, if the bullet hits a person as reported by another client to the server, then you get the hit. This means if you have a ping of 100ms, then as well as the time the bullet takes to travel you have to add on the ping time. Now, consider you were shooting at a target 200m away with say a garand. You shoot, the bullet takes 250 m/s to travel, then you add the 100 ms ping, there is a 350 ms latency. Thus, you have to predict where the target will be in a third of a second.

Of course, if the server is overloaded wierd things start happening and you would be better off in another server

BTW, go get desert combat 0.6


Thomas Burt,

Trauma Studios
This comment was edited on Dec 20, 06:42.
Gather 'round children and i'll tell you a tale,
Of chipper the ripper the chipmunk from hell
20.
 
Re: WTF?
Dec 20, 2003, 01:30
20.
Re: WTF? Dec 20, 2003, 01:30
Dec 20, 2003, 01:30
 
Checked the ET servers lately? There was a time when there were a lot of servers packed with players (I mean c'mon, it's a free game). Then PB updated their client and a lot of Nvidia owners suddenly couldn't run the game anymore. Overnight it was like ET lost a huge chunk of it's playerbase. Same thing happened to Raven Shield during it's PB client update.

Moreover PB doesn't keep you from cheating, it just stops the most obvious and easy to pull off game hacks. The cheats that are truly good are circulated among a quiet few players and they work fine regardless of whether PB is running on the server or not. Evenbalance tries to spin it like there is no cheat they can't detect and they're delusional. Patching the game is a much better way to derail cheaters and DICE has been doing that fantasticly so what's the need for PB?

I don't have an Nvidia card but I know a lot of players do and I would hate to log on to BF1942 one day and have to work to find a decent server with enough people for the game to be fun. When it shafts 1/2 your players it's not a good thing.

19.
 
LAg
Dec 20, 2003, 01:10
Vek
19.
LAg Dec 20, 2003, 01:10
Dec 20, 2003, 01:10
Vek
 
Actually a mixture of both posts is correct.

Firstly, bullets in BF42 have travel time. This is apparent in single player, on a lan, anywhere.

HOWEVER, there is the first bug - even tho bullets have travel time, DAMAGE-wise... graphically, the bullet 'puff' of dust hitting the ground or whatever is rendered INSTANTLY as you fire. No travel time. It appears instantly. Even miles away. A few seconds later the invisibile 'bullet' hits that spot.

SECONDLY
When you have latency (ping, lag, whatever), they still draw the puff of dust, play the guns sound effect (BLAM!) and the muzzle flash -INSTANTLY- even though the packet takes some time to reach the server. In fact, they even play the puff of dust or sparks or whatever on the ground or vehicle you're shooting at, INSTANTLY, again, with no travel time.

HOWEVER

The server only creates the invisible 'bullet' of actual DAMAGE when your packet arives, some time later. And -that- has travel time, compounding the problem.

This is why you can press the muzzle of your gun AGAINST SOMEONES CHEST (negating any travel time whatsoever), keep it there while they circle around you (Try it on an internet game with ~100 ping), have a friend circle around you slowly enough for you to keep pointed at him... or just have him move across your field of vision...
... and you can empty a clip at him. What happens? The gun 'appears' to fire instantly. In fact, puffs appear on his BODY, etc...

Yet by the time the invisible bullet of actual damage, not just graphic effect is created on the server, he has moved on. and it misses. No damage caused.

THIS is what makes it feel so flakey and broken.

Games with PROPER netcode like Half-Life's CounterStrike, etc, when it comes time to create the invisible 'bullet' of damage, actually project it back in time, seeing 'where eveyrone was' when you pulled the trigger, and score a hit or miss appropriately so the graphical blood or puff matches with what people see.

In other words, BF42 is half assed when it comes to one of the most important things in a shooter - lagcomp + hit detection.

Its actually WORSE to play effects on the client side that do not match whats really happening, than it is to not predict effects at all.

18.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 20, 2003, 00:38
18.
Re: No subject Dec 20, 2003, 00:38
Dec 20, 2003, 00:38
 
#14
the problem with planes is bullets have the same rate of travel regardless of how fast the plane is traveling. here's an example
When you press fire the bullet is spawned out of the planes gun and you EXPECT the bullet to have the planes speed in addition to the bullets speed. This is the way the real world functions. That's not how games function though. The bullet's actual speed is whatever the base bullet velocity is regardless of the plane's velocity. This is why you have to lead even more. The bullet is going roughly half of the normal speed relative to the target. This is assuming both planes at traveling at the same speed of course. Bf1942 treats projectiles as actual objects just like a jeep or tank.
In regards to Bf1942 netcode. it is a bandwidth hog . It's also a CPU hog. Start modding Battlefield and you will quickly find out the it is a very detailed physics simulator. get on a full 60 player server on wake island and wait till there's one flag left & every player is trying to attack the last one. It will bring any server I've seen so far to a stutter . When you have 60 ppl. blowing off 100's of bullets in a tight area , the game engine is computing every possible interaction with every poly. For everything that the engine is doing (even computing drag on the bullets!) it's netcode is great.
FYI the Bf1942 engine is the same engine used by Rallisport Challenge. I'd say it has fairly detailed physics.

This comment was edited on Dec 20, 00:40.
17.
 
Re: WTF?
Dec 19, 2003, 23:28
17.
Re: WTF? Dec 19, 2003, 23:28
Dec 19, 2003, 23:28
 
And how exactly is BF goin to get screwed??? I recall ET had punkpuster and there were no problems there. Me; I just think your upset because you'll no longer be able to cheat.

-Tony!!!;)
-Tony!!!;)
my 360 user name is Robo Pop
16.
 
WTF?
Dec 19, 2003, 23:21
16.
WTF? Dec 19, 2003, 23:21
Dec 19, 2003, 23:21
 
Great! Another decent shooter that's going to get screwed because of Punkbuster! Goddamn, can one games developer out there put together some anti-cheat technology of their own specifically for their game? PB causes a hell of a lot more problems than it solves and it doesn't work any better than semi-frequent patching by the developer that eliminates the cheats (which DICE has been doing a great job of with BF1942). So what's the freakin' point with PB? It's just going to screw the player base just like it screwed the player base in Enemy Territory and Raven Shield. It's no good having a game based on online play if no one can actually connect to the server to play against you!

15.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 19, 2003, 23:12
15.
Re: No subject Dec 19, 2003, 23:12
Dec 19, 2003, 23:12
 
1.6 Update Battlefield Command has busted butts to get the 1.6 patch done as quickly as possible

They busted ass? I knew I smelled something

This comment was edited on Dec 19, 23:12.
14.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 19, 2003, 22:57
Jow
14.
Re: No subject Dec 19, 2003, 22:57
Dec 19, 2003, 22:57
Jow
 
It's much worse in planes too, dude. You have to lead aircraft a ridiculous amount to get hits or kills, such that unless they're flying in a straight line it's near impossible to get quick kills via engine shots.

13.
 
No subject
Dec 19, 2003, 22:54
Bop
13.
No subject Dec 19, 2003, 22:54
Dec 19, 2003, 22:54
Bop
 
They actually introduced blood in 1.4 go install the patch and see for yourself, YOUR the one who is wrong. After they realised what happened they took it out in the next patch.

I've took this discussion to the planet battlefield forums awhile ago and explained the whole thing, it IS lag and if you want the proof go to www.planetbattlefield.com and search for my old post about the netcode. After I took the time to explain it everyone there understood the issue. Sry but I can't recall the exact topic name right now but search for post from BopC.O.P if you want to know the actual truth of the issue instead of assumptions that you think are right.

In the current state the game's netcode is in, id rather die half a second after im shot than lead my targets 5 ft when they are 20ft in front of me when im getting 35 ping.

12.
 
Re: No subject
Dec 19, 2003, 22:50
Jow
12.
Re: No subject Dec 19, 2003, 22:50
Dec 19, 2003, 22:50
Jow
 
Uh, yeah, actually, it IS lag that causes you to have to lead people, vehicles, and planes. Before you go off, yeah, I know it makes sense to have to lead targets to hit them, and I'm used to that. There may be some built-in "travel time" for bullets and other projectiles, but I've hosed down enough planes with pieces flying off with no actual damage inflicted and nailed so many vehicles in the ass or sides with antitank weapons but watched them drive away unscathed to know that there ARE network issues on top of the so-called "travel time" and that these network issues are so inherent to the engine design that they're not gonna change. I'm hoping they do something with the network code in BF: Vietnam but I'm not holding my breath.

31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
Newer [  1  2  ] Older