Battlefield 2 Review

By Kieron Gillen Published 24 June, 2005

Don't bring a gun to a tankfight. Except an anti-tank gun. That's okay.

Version tested: PC

If Battlefield has a fault, then it's that it doesn't spew golden coins from the top of your monitor when you play it. More realistically, it's that as a multiplayer game which opened up its code to the community, inclusions in the latest edition are things we might have already seen (and become overly familiar with) in a mod capacity. If it wasn't for Desert Combat, the modern setting alone would be enough to make people queue up to reenlist in a Battlefield sequel. As it is, we're a little harder to impress. Basic limitations like a smallish selection of maps and that there's only one game mode included also makes hackles rise. It's lucky that the beauty of Battlefield is in the details.

Obviously, technologically the game's a huge step forward. Graphical fidelity is one thing, but its things like the vehicle's physics which really impress. The sensation of skidding a buggy down a side road while trying to get the hell out of there before a tank manages to turn its turret on you is absolutely impeccable. Speaking generally, the vehicle additions like expanded-used helicopters and fighter jets add to the tactical possibilities of the conflict. Admittedly, until you master them, these tactical possibilities mainly involve crashing into a hilltop at high speed, but that's beside the point. Oh - and a quick note to everyone. Do master both of the flying machines before trying it on an open server, because if you don't and I'm in it when you crash, I'll explode your head with my enormous telekinetic powers. Truth.

Three sides are included: the popular US Marines, a Middle-East coalition and top-commies China. For ease of play and to help reinforce American feelings of fear and vulnerability, they have fairly equivalent powers. Most interesting are the character classes which you get to play. Seven are included, with a skillset expanded from previous games. We have Special Forces (Best thing: Satchel charges), Assault (Best thing: Under-gun grenade launcher), Snipers (Best thing: Oh, use your head), Engineers (Best thing: If they're doing their job, fixing stuff. If they're moonlighting, anti-tank mines), Medics (Best thing: Being the ibuprofen dispenser which walks on two legs) and Support (Best thing: Er… well, we'll get back to that one. Perhaps that the Machine Gun makes a nice noise?).

'Battlefield 2' Screenshot 1

Some specific additions to some characters, like Medics being able to resuscitate a fallen comrade if they get to their corpse within a time limit, are absolutely golden. It introduces a great axis for this support class, where you balance between the possibility for heroism and the very real risk to your neck. After all, getting to a body which has just been killed implies that there's someone around who could easily do the same to you.

The biggest fundamentals are the addition of a Commander and Squad command level. If you join a squad, you gain the ability to respawn where the leader is, as well as receive waypoints and other commands from the leader. It's absolutely a boon in continuing assaults against a position, and an implicit encouragement for team play, especially with the built-in voice communication in a squad. While also existing on the map, the Commander's real role is to abstractly co-ordinate the battle on the strategy map, ordering scans, deploying the UAV to reveal enemy in a locale and choosing targets for the batteries. That each of these resources can be taken out (and later repaired, reactivating them), adds another consideration to the conflict.

Also intriguing is a small element of persistence to the game, where your performance and abilities are tracked as long as you play on certain ranked servers. While much of this is just to keep track of your performance, there's also an element akin to experience points. Perform decently and they'll accumulate, and unlock optional alternate weapons for classes. While it's an interesting motivation to play more, you have to note that it undermines the level playing field of the game slightly, in that people who play longer don't just have more approaches open due to their increased knowledge of the game, but necessarily due to their increased arsenal. Whether this is a welcome move to encourage people to play more or something which hurts newcomers will depend on whether the unlocked weapons' balancing makes them an interesting alternative or actually better. Perhaps in the longer term, the basic accumulation of medals - awarded as you perform well - will be what we see in more games. While basically just gold stars for a good pupil, having the game recognise your performance with an award is actually a very nice touch.

'Battlefield 2' Screenshot 2

But is it any good?

A problem when reviewing any purely competitive multiplayer game is that you can feel a little useless. It's not as if when talking about chess anyone spends much time talking about the relative merits of the pieces ("The Knight is overpowered, with his frankly ludicrous teleport ability. And the King's been nerfed. I mean, what's this one square at a time crap?"), but that's what's generally demanded when talking about these sort of games. To choose a real world example, a kickabout in the park is only good relative to the people who you're playing with. Play with a group of Bigger Boys (Copyright Schoolyard conversations circa 1950) with a tendency to tackle at groin height, and it's rubbish.

With this in mind, when reviewing a game like Battlefield 2, you should essentially be answering three distinct questions:

1) At its highest level of play, with all its aspects working at an optimum, how fun is it?
2) How likely is that optimum play be reached?
3) And if it doesn't hit that optimum, how good is the likely level to be?

'Battlefield 2' Screenshot 3

On the first point, Battlefield scores highly. Extremely highly. On a server packed full of humans, with a decent commander and motivated, organised squads it plays like an absolute dream. So hurrah for that.

But for the second point the probable answer is - outside of clan-based servers - not that likely. People are awkward little creatures. They won't co-operate and form neat, orderly regiments. They'll much more likely run off, jump in a vehicle that catches their eye, and head off towards the distance. The fact that Battlefield 2 is a more complicated game than the original means that there's much more information to process before you can even start to play optimally. While the original game's main strength was that despite the array of options, it was relatively accessible to pick up and play, Battlefield 2 can bemuse. And bemused people on a team-lead game just cause everything to grind to a halt.

Talking about grinding to a halt, there's a few technical niggles. The server browser has a tendency towards sluggishness, not actually operating anywhere as well as you'd hope. Similarly, it's extremely spec hungry, with some nasty frame rate drops. Equally, there have been some complaints of serious lag issues.

But despite this, on the third clause it still hits an admirably high level. As a commander or squad leader, with troops who don't follow your orders, it's easy to get dispirited. Don't. Despite the fact sixty-four people can be running around one of these maps, it's possible for a few individuals who have the presence of mind to consider their situation to change the destiny of a map. Take and hold an undefended point to allow your team to start respawning outside an awkward corner. Have an engineer reactivate your team's artillery or scanners to help plan the mission. Even if there's only one organised squad on a server, their focused drive changes the shape of the battle.

'Battlefield 2' Screenshot 4

There have been conflicts where I've been part of the only squad on our side who appear to even thinking of a tactical level. But during those times, we didn't feel dispirited - we felt like an elite corps who knew what needed to be done and were the only men in this godforsaken army with the skills and ability to do it. When I finally dared step into the commander's boots on an open server, because nobody else was going to do so and my side was being thrashed so soundly it didn't matter if I messed up, it became clear how useful the position is even if barely anyone is paying attention. By scanning the battlefield and positioning artillery fire you can help slow down opposing thrusts against your troops, who may be entirely unaware how much you're saving their asses. And when it works, and you're the commander of an organised army… well, it's brilliant. While you may wish the controls for ordering were a little slicker and more sophisticated, since you can only set single waypoints rather than a multi-step route, increased sophistication may only alienate the squad commanders. Micromanaging troops in an RTS is one thing… but micromanaging actual people is a cause of real antagonism.

(Perhaps the most interesting thing about the Commander and Squad-leader roles is that, in a very real way, they demand actual charisma. My favourite squad leader utilised the voice-over-net systems regularly, and his caring, encouraging tones ("Get down, Medic! I need you alive, man") forged one of my favourite memories of BF2 so far.)

Best of all, despite the fact that play on an open server is never going to reach the optimum quality, the game's designed to encourage squad-based behaviour. For new people, you may join a squad just to get the extra spawn point, probably nearer the action. However, once you start to use it, and find yourself in an organised team, and see them moving from point to point and covering each other, it's a natural instinct to start to conform to their behaviour. And the second you start doing that, the game transmutes from a load of people just running around a map into something that feels like a real, tactical game which demands both mental and physical skill.

Battlefield has always been a contender in any serious debate about the best online shooter ever. This latest edition only helps cement that particular case.

9 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kieron.

About Kieron Gillen

Kieron is one of the founders of the lovely Rock, Paper, Shotgun and nowadays writes comics for Marvel starring characters that even his mum has heard of.

Read more articles from Kieron by visiting the Kieron Gillen archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (68) Latest comment 7 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • OldWormsFan #1 7 years ago

    Errrm how? Surely this game is mainly to be played online so how can you base a 9/10 playing an Offline Skirmish mode?

  • UncleLou #2 7 years ago

    It's not as if when talking about chess anyone spends much time talking about the relative merits of the pieces ("The Knight is overpowered, with his frankly ludicrous teleport ability. And the King's been nerfed. I mean, what's this one square at a time crap?";),

    Excellent. :)

  • Ryu #3 7 years ago

    what difference does it make playing against bots and playing against other users, when you are conducting a review?

    if theres an offline skirmish wouldn't that be an easier option to opt for when reviewing the product's playability, graphics, balanced gameplay etc?

  • asphaltcowboy #4 7 years ago

    How do you know he's based it on the Offline Skirmish mode?
    And yes, good review Kieron. 9/10 is absolutely, 100% deserved.

    Hurray for PCs!

  • ali-uk #5 7 years ago

    The demo sure was buggy, hope this is better. Besides, it wasn't that good - ET and Joint Ops still rise above it.

  • Dizzy #6 7 years ago

    >Hurray for PCs!

    Err.. wasn't this coming to consoles as well? 360 maybe?

  • TILT #7 7 years ago

    I heard in another review that offline mode wasn't so hot... so, as a non-online person, will it still be interesting to play it (with bots or whatnot), or should I not bother?

  • Tweakmonkey #8 7 years ago

    Brilliant review. Battlefield is the daddy of online games now (surpassing CS), and with these new commander and leader roles it sounds amazing. All I need now is a new PC!

  • Mashum #9 7 years ago

    I'm sold already - but as a battlefield virgin I'd like to know a bit more about how it plays... how long do the rounds last, how do you win, can you respawn as often as you like (is there a penalty for respawning?) etc etc..

  • Wash #10 7 years ago

    Offline is boring, it never has the same feel as jumping online. Then again, playing with AI Bots means they arent gonna turn round a shoot you in the head if you beat them to a vehicle.

    pluses and negatives.

  • asphaltcowboy #11 7 years ago

    The single player is fun enough, but you only have access to the 16 player maps... until someone writess a hack for it. Arguably, it's not really worth it if you're not online. Argulably, it's worth getting online just for this!

    ali-uk: I'm afraid that, whilst ET is brilliant (I'm an addict with my mates at uni on the lab machines), BF2 is far superior.I am however, looking forward to ET:QW.

  • Tweakmonkey #12 7 years ago

    At the risk of looking stupid, what is ET?

  • asphaltcowboy #13 7 years ago

    Return to Castle Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory

    Basically like Team Fortress Classic, but free (without requiring RTCW) and based on the RTCW universe.
    Edited by 1 at 24/06/05 @ 10:18

  • pjmaybe #14 7 years ago

    "I'm sold already - but as a battlefield virgin I'd like to know a bit more about how it plays... how long do the rounds last, how do you win, can you respawn as often as you like (is there a penalty for respawning?) etc etc.."

    Rounds can last however long you like, time is set on the server. You win by either completely eradicating the enemy's tickets (say a 300 ticket game, kill 300 enemies and you win) or by capping all of the bases in a set time.

    You can respawn as often as you like if there are spawn points - if the enemy has 'em all your tickets will swiftly go down to 0 and you will lose. Penalties for respawning often depend on how you die so if you suicide your spawn time will be longer. Again spawn time can be set on the server.

    Well deserved 9/10 for offline but online it should get a 10 easily.

    Peej

  • krudster #15 7 years ago

    Kieron most certainly was not playing offline. EA set up servers, plus the game has actually been out in the US since the 21st, hence real people playing it.

  • BremXJones #16 7 years ago

    The full game's been on a load of servers for weeks. Just because you haven't been able to play them, didn't mean they don't exist.

    KG

  • Grom #17 7 years ago

    Poor Splash Damage, they're stealing your ideas! Still, you made the best game in ages.

  • jumpdeveraux #18 7 years ago

    Great review, nipping down to Game at lunch to pick up the game proper but have been v. impressed with the demo.

    Hopefully they'll improve the server browser going forward as it's a complete dog.

  • Nasty #19 7 years ago

    Support class drops ammo by the way ;o) Very (very) essential in an attacking squad. LMGs are underpowered though.

    Playing it in Tournament or Clan games is essential though. Public servers are the bane of this type of games existance and make for many frustrating hours of play.

    I go for the Tournament route cos I'm too lazy to join a clan. Theres a couple out there that will be using BF2. Recommend you look out for them if you fancy just a wee side of organisation with your BF Steak.

    Edited by 1 at 24/06/05 @ 11:07

  • Aga #20 7 years ago

    For a free game, it is very good. Online only though, so bring friends!

  • PearOfAnguish #21 7 years ago

    I wouldn't call the server browser 'a bit sluggish'. I'd call it a fucking heap of useless shit.
    Also: support class is useless, because the crappy machine gun can't hit the side of a tank from 10 metres away, the TK punish system is possibly the most stupid thing I've ever seen in an online game and the merest nudge from a vehicle kills the little troopers, meaning arseholes stand behind your tanks or in front of planes so they can get you kicked and banned off servers so you don't steal 'their' vehicles.

    "The copters and the planes are a bitch to fly. mainly because map size is so small and any off-map route is immediately punished. I am staying away from them at the moment."

    Huh? In the original, you were punished for straying into any of the red areas, in BF2 you're allowed to fly inside them. You still can't go off the map, but that's obvious anyway.

  • Teeth #22 7 years ago

    There are some glaring errors in sentence construction and meaning in this review.

    "2) How likely is that optimum play be reached"

    "There have been conflicts where I've been part of the only squad on our side who appear to even thinking of a tactical level."

    The above examples being two of them.

  • Teeth #23 7 years ago

    "For a free game, it is very good."

    Free except for the Ł30 it costs to buy a copy, you mean?

  • Shrimp #24 7 years ago

    Free is it? What a fool I was to pay 20 odd quid for it the other day...

    Anyway...

    edit: Make that 28 quid.... and Teeth beat me to it...
    Edited by 1 at 24/06/05 @ 11:17

  • Pike #25 7 years ago

    Great review Kieron.

    One question though. Woud it be possible to see some of the EG staff on the EG BF 2 server sometime?

  • Whizzo #26 7 years ago

    I believe the free comment was concerning Enemy Territory, which is a free download.

    BF2 is great, just sort out some of the issues it has with some hardware and the annoyances and it'll be virtually perfect.

  • Furbs #27 7 years ago

    Oh cool!! Theres somewhere else to post :)
    I just umm, cant think of anything else to add at the moment other than "bloody high street retailers".
    Edit - (knew I'd think of something!). So did you EG staff use the server us readers play on to get any idea how well the squad works? Probably not if you felt like being part of an "elite" unit :p
    Edited by 1 at 24/06/05 @ 11:24

  • Shrimp #28 7 years ago

    Seriously, my major beef with this so far is that the persistent ranking system is F**KING BROKEN! (for me anyway).

    Was just playing on a really good server for about 45 minutes, dipping into commander mode a bit, getting loads of capture and kill scores in a BlackHawk, and looking forward to my promotion/medal/progress towards unlocking new weapons. When the server changes maps the loading screen even changes to show you all those points being racked up....

    But then, 5 tickets from the end of the next map the connection goes down and I'm kicked out to the frontend. I click on the BFHQ tab and... i have no points, no stats, nothing.

    What the hell?? Anyone else had this problem? (And yes, I was playing on a ranked server)

  • ThwartedEfforts #29 7 years ago

    It's a big, Independence Day mothership-size shame about the lack of game modes other than Conquest. I'm no CTF whore, but other shooters (most notably Unreal Tournament) have successfully introduced a different gameplay styles to help you keep enjoying what are essentially a tiny number of good maps. Replaying the same strategy over and over... and over and over... is sure to be a turn-off.

    Let's hope a mod puts that right. It was mods such as Desert Combat which gave Battlefield 1942 the longevity it never really deserved.

  • Shrimp #30 7 years ago

    "I believe the free comment was concerning Enemy Territory, which is a free download. "

    Ah ok... sorry Aga

  • PearOfAnguish #31 7 years ago

    Good point, Thwarted, the lack of CTF or any other mode is fucking criminal.

    And hey, EA, what about you banning servers that unlock the weapons without your permission? Not very nice behaviour, is it.

  • Furbs #32 7 years ago

    /can see this turning into something like the official forum.
    /waits for first complaint about helicopters

  • statix101 #33 7 years ago

    Only get it once its had the inevitable couple of patches....will be a much better game then

  • Nasty #34 7 years ago

    It needs a push style gameplay like Joint Ops (ie you can only capture C or D if you already have A and B).

    The randomness of gameplay does not mix well with the organisation the squad setup attempts to promote.

    Hopefully a mod will sort this (and the Unreal esque weapon damage. C'mon half a clip to the chest to kill someone?).

  • souljah #35 7 years ago

    Shrimp, about the rankings. I played for a few hours yesterday on ranked servers and I only recieved my points and stats this morning. Ive heard many people say that theres a delay between playing and awarding.

  • MoFo #36 7 years ago

    and the Unreal esque weapon damage. C'mon half a clip to the chest to kill someone?

    Yawn! How many times do people moan about this!? People are like "It should be like real life where one shot kills you". And then you give em a game like this and they're like "This is shit. I keep dying every few seconds." Trust me, I made a mod like this for RTCW and it really was shit.

  • Stu #37 7 years ago

    Question is, do I get this or Rome: Total War?

  • sir_tripod #38 7 years ago

    Could anyone with a copy of the game say whether it's less jerky in online mode than it is offline?

    I have played it on what I'd call a good system: MSI Neo2 Platinum, Athlon 64 3000+, MSI 5900XT and 1Gb RAM. (No this isn't a cue for a bragging contest.) Yet playing against 15 bots on it, the system really struggles on 800x600 with medium detail and 90% draw distance.

    Anyone have any opinions/pointers?

  • PearOfAnguish #39 7 years ago

    In theory tripid, online performance should be better because your system wouldn't be handling AI bots.

  • Clive_Dunn #40 7 years ago

    That's odd Sir Tripod - I have a Althon 2500@2.2 gig, 1gig ram, radeon 9800 pro. Runs pretty smoothly at 1280x960 with 15 bots. Have you got stuff running in the background ? Or try a spyware scan, and if that still doesn't work a fresh install might help - along with an update of all relevant drivers.

    It's a system hog for sure, but seems pretty scaleable and well put together. Unlike Boiling Point, which runs like a dog. Grrrr.

  • El_MUERkO #41 7 years ago

    217.158.150.36:16567

  • Nasty #42 7 years ago

    Yawn! How many times do people moan about this!? People are like "It should be like real life where one shot kills you". And then you give em a game like this and they're like "This is shit. I keep dying every few seconds." Trust me, I made a mod like this for RTCW and it really was shit.

    I did say a mod, and previously theres been plenty of mods that up the damage done by weapons that have been successful (forgotten hope abd XWW2 for BF42 for example). It's mearly my personal preference. No need to go all yawny and tell me I'm wrong and you're right.

  • Shrimp #43 7 years ago

    souljah... yeah I'm coming to that conclusion too. Maybe the ranked game servers collate data and then upload it to the central stats servers in batches.

  • Furbs #44 7 years ago

    EA have confirmed theres a delay on the official website.

  • allen #45 7 years ago

    Huh? In the original, you were punished for straying into any of the red areas, in BF2 you're allowed to fly inside them. You still can't go off the map, but that's obvious anyway.

    If you stay in the red area too long, even while flying, you will lose health rapidly. It takes about 15 seconds to start and about 5 seconds to kill you. Easilly enough time to dive in and out the red areas though.
    Edited by 1 at 24/06/05 @ 13:58

  • thebuzzard #46 7 years ago

    Anyone who says the maps are too small for choppers/planes clearly hasnt played the 64 players versions.

  • Hunam85 #47 7 years ago

    Id knock it down to 8/10 for the dire menu system with entails a pathetic server browser (gamespy powerd of course) and sluggish out of game performance, takes an age to login to your account normally and no auto-retry untill join feature, and then the bugs, which as EA planned hit in right when your having fun

  • PearOfAnguish #48 7 years ago

    "If you stay in the red area too long, even while flying, you will lose health rapidly. It takes about 15 seconds to start and about 5 seconds to kill you. Easilly enough time to dive in and out the red areas though."

    That only happens when you go off the map, not when you're flying through the red striped areas. Unless they've changed it from the demo.

    "Err.. wasn't this coming to consoles as well? 360 maybe?"

    A version of it is, called Modern Combat. Good luck flying the planes and choppers with a joypad though.
    Edited by 1 at 24/06/05 @ 14:35

  • Feanor #49 7 years ago

    Shouldn't be a problem if they change the controls to suit conmtrol pads. Ace Combat seems to control alright on the PS2.

  • Mashum #50 7 years ago

    Thx Peej

  • lemonfist #51 7 years ago

    I don't see why it would be a problem controlling choppers and planes with a joypad in the console versions. I plugged my Xbox controller to the PC with a USB converter, and it works really well with the game. Much better than the regular mouse/keyboard combo, but probably not as good as with a quality joystick.

  • penfold #52 7 years ago

    I got back from work expecting it ob my doormat.

    and it wasnt.

    Bastard play.com/Royal Mail, im not happy.

  • kdjac #53 7 years ago

    Great game , seriously amazing.

    But i would detract 1 point just for that shambolic menu , havent these people played Ut2004 and know what a MP only game interface is meant to look like.


    kdjac

  • Hunam85 #54 7 years ago

    UT's isnt the best in the world, the Steam menu's however work for me

  • Captain Jax #55 7 years ago

    There are serious crashing issues with this game.

  • meggsy #56 7 years ago

    Lemonfist - Likewise am using a console gamepad to play, in my case a PS2 controller, but how can I get the anologue sticks to replace the mouse for looking/controlling the main gun in tanks and apcs?

  • lemonfist #57 7 years ago

    rdexter: I've found that shooting in short burts improves your accuracy substantially. Also, changing firing mode to one shot at the time has been very benificial in the long range shoot-outs (sometimes the regular assault rifle even seems more accurate than the sniper rifle, oddly). Or if it's the Support's machine gun, then you will gain much higher accuracy when you're prone.

    Still, it's not easy hitting people when they're running, which is a good thing IMO. There doesn't seem to be as many cheap one-shot kills as in other FPS'es.

    meggsy: I haven't tried that, but I would assume it's simply not possible.

  • GitSomE_UK #58 7 years ago

    Battlefield 2 certainly gives me the chub on however, the majority of ranked servers perform like dogs the lag is unbearable.

    In addition there doesn't seem to be enough ranked servers out there, all were full and those that weren't were lag fests.

    Playing on non ranked servers it's mostly ok.

    Me thinks EA should have given out a minimum standard spec for all those who want to host an EA ranked server.

    Apart from that B2 is one of the best FPS's I've played in a looooooong time.

  • masterson #59 7 years ago

    Boring question - Does anybody know if the retail version supports 1280x1024? The demo did not and consequently looked a bit crap on my flat panel...

  • lemonfist #60 7 years ago

    I haven't checked with the retail, but in the demo you could force it to support it by changing the command line in your shortcut to look like this (or whatever your directory is, obviously): "C:\Program Files\EA Games\Battlefield 2\BF2.exe" +menu 1 +fullscreen 1 +szx 1280 +szy 1024
    Edited by 1 at 26/06/05 @ 12:15

  • Yama #61 7 years ago

    I disagree with the "Support class is crap" sentiments. Having played the retail version for a couple days now, and mostly with the Support class, I've done really well. The LMG is less accurate, but you have 3 - 6 times more ammunition than the rifles do, so it encourages you to pump out dozens of rounds at your enemies. It's meant for pinning down groups of troops at mid and long range. Also, you can infinitely give out more ammo to teammates by simply holding out the ammobag as you stand near them, rather than dropping the finite supply of ammobags. I resupplied 2 antitank teammates for 5 minutes of constant tank-hunting this way, racking up ammo supply points, and gunning down enemy soldiers that got too close. It's a good class if you like helping teammates rather than going lonewolf and killwhoring.

  • ThwartedEfforts #62 7 years ago

    I should warn fans of BF1942 and/or DC that as well as being stuck with one game mode, this new version has no equivalent to the large desert maps (which is odd, because the large desert maps are the most popular by some margin). BF2 levels are highly detailed and authentic, but with no wide open spaces are cramped and too melee-centric. Whereas in BF1942 you can sneak through a valley unnoticed and take up defensive positions at some distant flag, thus creating a mini 'king-of-the-hill' game within the larger battle, most BF2 points not only overlook one another but are often joined by roads - it's too easy for your opponents to respawn nearby and nip back for another pop ten seconds after you last killed them. In this respect, the fighting doesn't ebb and flow like the original game, but is constant and not that fun - the death rate is far higher than in BF, with almost all players reaching double figures. Add in the fact that the Commander can see your whereabouts and call in artillery means you always feel under pressure to keep moving. If you're playing it to enjoy it, and prefer a more relaxed style of game, I'd recommend playing the big maps with smaller numbers of people.

  • Cheezit #63 7 years ago

    Kind of see your point about lack of large desert maps (I always had a soft spot for 73 Easting), but I don't have a problem with BF2's map layouts at all. I think there's plenty of space on some of the maps, and its nice to get back into the fray as quickly as possible without having to drag your ass half way across the map all the time. I was playing Dragon Valley last night, the Chinese had one spawn left in a really defensable position, but it made for a really intense battle; drop arty on them, pile on from 3 angles, maybe you get killed but right back into it. Probably the most intense game of any version of BF I've ever played. Horses for courses I suppose...

  • Vanity #64 7 years ago

    if you haven't tried it yet try Joint Operations and the add-on pack. Everything in BF2 was there long ago and this is, imho, wildly underated, agreed BF2 is more newb friendly but the balance between fun and authenticity in the Joint Ops games is far better.
    Edited by 1 at 27/06/05 @ 17:20

  • Furbs #65 7 years ago

    I guess I missed the squad element in JO? Its unfair to say everything in BF2 is taken from JO, since everything in JO was pretty much taken from the BF series in the first place. OK it added more players and a contemporary setting with the vehicles that come with it, but at the end of the day, its just an evolution. Plus, at least Dice listen to their users when it comes to patches. Nova totally borked alot of things with the last patch and since then dont seem to have done anything.
    Dont get me wrong, I like JO (and BHD even more), but I've never seen as much teamwork in any game to date as BF2. One thing it should steal from JO though is the motorbikes!

  • Merefield #66 7 years ago

    In theory tripid, online performance should be better because your system wouldn't be handling AI bots.

    Strangey, with my 6800 GT equiped Athlon 3200 I find online play is more resource intensive than with the 15 bots.

    What that is down to I don't know - large size of online maps? processing of so many more players?? Doesn't make complete sense - you'd think the lack of required AI would ease the situation ...

    Also, have noticed the benchies on X800/X850 cards are WAY better than nVidia 6800 series - a driver issue??
    Edited by 1 at 04/07/05 @ 13:06

  • pablo2001jedi #67 7 years ago

    Playing the demo I get a lot of "connection inerrupt" message. Dont know why PC is prity decent AMD64 3200, 512MBRam (OK I guess I need 1Gb) 1024/128 net connection.

    I wont buy the game on the count that the demo is too laggy for me.

  • kelticknight #68 7 years ago

    2 things
    first /get connection error,don't know why,have satalitte connection,no prob with any other game playing
    2/the lag can be a prob as so many are playing
    great both in offline and online
    how do you get the extra weopans when playing offline