[bf1942] Petition for BF1942!
leeprivate at cgmlarson.com
Tue Jul 27 13:00:46 EDT 2004
My biggest problem is that BFV was not actually an updated '42 server, but
an old version with bastardized new stuff, and not the fixes and
enhancements found in '42. This is a purely technical source code control
issue presumably at DICE.
I could tolerate it if it actually was an update...though still very
If it was actullAt 11:15 AM 7/27/2004, you wrote:
>I've been running HL servers for a long, long time. I do indeed agree that
>Steam is not what I'd like to see. Actually, wasn't it for the WON servers
>to be disabled this week, I wouldn't be changing at all. I liked the way it
>However, saying Valve should be screwed is dead wrong. They had their
>reasons to change to steam, and though many don't like it, it's a fact of
>gaming life. Valve DID something I don't see happening with Dice here
>though: Eversince the initial release of Half-Life, there were updates an
>patches, over and over again. Some were good, some should've been better.
>The reason why Valve's game was a solid success, was not only its terrific
>support on the linux platform (something BF had to do without for quite some
>time) but most importantly the continuous improvements of the engine.
>Nowaday's most people don't even recall the struggle with voice
>communication and all... it was put in there with a simple update.
>I can agree with the petition here, simply because I bought a game, BF1942,
>to see how I could support a good server running it. But most of the players
>I had decided to hop on the next game BFV... And when that sorta runs... the
>next game is there.... But will Dice or EA commit itself to new patches and
>improvements of old games, or can we just plain accept that this is what we
>have, won't get any better and thus if we want improvements on a gameserving
>box we simply run the next game? I sure hope not. I subscribed to this list
>for 1942... I haven't seen a post about '42 in months. Seeing support of the
>original Battlefield, I don't even think about buying BFV... as soon as it's
>up, support is dropped in the benefit of the next version. I'd rather say
>Screw that then blaming Valve for the next step in HL-evolution (which - as
>opposed to BF - is a free update instead of an entirely new game.)
>Van: Rick Thompson [mailto:fortweb at fortweb.com]
>Verzonden: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 5:23 PM
>Aan: bf1942 at icculus.org
>Onderwerp: Re: [bf1942] Petition for BF1942!
>We also have tried most games out there and BF is as easy on the cpu as any
>of them, much better than many. (Steam is a sickness, BF is the cure! Screw
>The idle cpu issue is insignificant, so what if it runs 15% when it is
>idling or with 10 people connected? We sell games to cover the max amount
>of load they can generate anyway so if every server was maxed out, the box
>can still breath... they can sit there and run 15% empty all day long if
>they want, we don't care. People not planning their bandwidth/cpu that way
>are gouging their customers.
More information about the Bf1942