[bf1942] Punkbuster confirmed for 1.6

[Andreas Fredriksson]

Well, I did the PB integration and carefully throttled the bandwidth
so that you'll hardly notice PB updates as a player on an ISDN link.

The BF integration is unique in this regard because screenshots and
net speeds for PB are all throttled by the game's own network layer.

I can't see the point in complaining about lag until you've even tried
the system.

// Andreas

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www clan - Starkness [mailto:starkness at wwwclan.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 5:15 PM
> To: bf1942 at icculus.org
> Subject: RE: [bf1942] Punkbuster confirmed for 1.6
> 
> 
> Sad but true.  When you try to update their client or server 
> side software patches through your console in the game 
> (sof2), it takes forever for their servers to respond and 
> send you the patch.  I have watched pings soar in SOF2 from 
> 40's and 50's to never below 100 and this affected everyone 
> playing the game, after punkbuster took over.  Their 
> technique of catching punk ass bitches is paying off in some 
> circles, i.e..  a whole slew of punks from top clans were 
> removed from CAL sof2 ladder just recently because of being 
> caught by pb.  There are pro's and con's to pb but it took a 
> lot of the fun out of SOF2 because lag is attributed to their 
> overloaded jacked-up servers/lousy connection?
> 
> Thank God other games are just on the horizon.  IMHO bf1942 
> is going to suck after pb takes over...
> 
> my $.02
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steven Hartland [mailto:killing at barrysworld.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 7:24 AM
> To: bf1942 at icculus.org
> Subject: Re: [bf1942] Punkbuster confirmed for 1.6
> 
> 
> Time will only tell but from my experiences with PB it causes 
> more problems for the admin than it solves :(
> 
>     Steve / K
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "SySt3M" <syst3m at downclan.com>
> To: <bf1942 at icculus.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 02, 2003 12:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [bf1942] Punkbuster confirmed for 1.6
> 
> 
> > I'm the same, I think its great that DICE are at least 
> addressing the
> issue.
> >
> > >i disagree
> 
>