[bf1942] How could DICE agree to this??

[Lee Latham]

I'm all for a voluntary ranking system, but the reason I don't play 
MMORPG's is because I'm not foolish enough to spend all my time playing 
games.  I am what is called a casual-hardcore gamer.  I like the best 
games, but I play only when I feel like it.

Not only that, but I'll be damned if I ever take orders from a 12 year old, 
and I won't play a game that penalizes me for not doing so.  Sure, in a 
clanmatch or something where I have a high opinion of some particular 12 
year old we can talk about it, but not some random server.

Now that I think about it, I'm not high on being required to take orders 
from anyone in a GAME.  Too many people forget that the point of the 
exercize is to have FUN.  Remember that?  I have to take orders at work.

Again, a clanmatch where the whole point of the exercize is to be efficient 
and plan well is one thing, but for casual gaming I just wanna jump in and 
raise hell.  I'm sure you've all see plany of BF games where no one gives a 
damn about the team winning, but then also plenty of other games where all 
of a sudden, unpredictably, every player on both sides suddenly decides the 
team MUST win, kamikaze themselves in pursuit of that, and really do an all 
out, unselfish effort for the team.  That's when I like BF best, when it 
just happens naturally.  It's really cool that way.

So it would be a SERIOUS drag if you could only utilize the full potential 
of the game by participating in the ranking system.  And again I'll be 
damned if I'm gonna let that loser 12 year old who spends all his time 
gaming frag me serially with some weapon that I can't get!!!!

lee
At 09:43 AM 2/16/2005, you wrote:
>Did anyone else see this interview?  A former customer of mine showed it 
>to me.
>
><http://www.realityfriends.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=573>http://www.realityfriends.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=573
>
>  All this sounds great, but a few more details have come out that are of 
> concern:
>1. Higher ranks get access to exclusive 'unlock' weapons
>2. Higher ranks are the default choice for 'commander'
>3. Only EA servers (offical and those rented from EA) will be 'ranking' 
>servers (eg: players can only earn rank when playing on EA servers)
>4. Ranks will still be visible on unranked servers and therefore ranked 
>players can get access to the unlocked weapons on unranked servers (and 
>potentially a factor in determining who is commander)
>5. Unranked servers can 'turn off' unlockable weapons, but cant 
>universally unlock them for all players
>
>As you can imagine this creates a series of issues:
>1. Inbalance between players with access to unlocked weapons and those 
>without (especially for casual gamers or those late to the game)
>- plus will regular players on unranked (nonEA) servers get have to hand 
>over 'commander mode' to anyone who has a rank (which he carried over from 
>the EA servers)
>
>2. Inbalance between EA servers and private servers (such as the ECGN 
>public servers or those rented from ECGN)
>- Are the 'unranked' servers going to become 'ghost towns'?
>
>
>Personally I think giving ranks anything more than bragging rights is a 
>mistake (eg: special weapons). And I think only providing them on EA 
>servers and EA rented servers is blackmail.  They did this with Americas 
>Army and it didnt work out that well.
>
>thoughts?
>
>Jon