[bf1942] Ban email

Lee Latham leeprivate at cgmlarson.com
Wed Jun 15 12:36:24 EDT 2005

Actually, I gotta say, many clan servers are not the most pleasant playing 
environments.  For that matter, just reading/hearing the running chatter on 
many servers is asinine enough to turn off any newb gamer.

I think it might be constructive to consider what EA's goals are, which is 
to get another Evercrack with a first person shooter.  They are trying to 
construct a long term business model, and a few petulant cancelled orders 
are of no consequence whatsoever.

What will matter is if players can't find any good server to connect 
to.  The fact of the matter is that it IS possible for EA to monopolize the 
server business.  It can be done.  If Google and Yahoo and Amazon.com can 
function as well as they do, then EA can be the only game server provider 
for their game.

The important thing is will people who go to Best Buy and buy the game get 
a good online gaming experience.  In all candour, I must say that EA's 
servers are about exactly as good as the average random server, and better 
than most I have played on.  Lots of crappy servers out there.

Don't get me wrong--I find their behavior juvenile and offensive, but a lot 
of the comments here are juvenile and petulant, and, if I may say so, 

I know I won't be running a server--I've always just done it for love--but 
the proof is in the pudding.  If Joe Customer can't get a good server to 
play on, EA will come crawling to this mailing list for help.  I'll let you 
compute the odds of that happening.


At 08:31 AM 6/15/2005, you wrote:
>Hear, hear. The EA servers were never well run, and (sorry to say)
>many of the other servers out there are on oversubscribed hosts. The
>best servers are those run with TLC by a clan who wants the best
>On 15 Jun 2005, at 00:59 , Joe wrote:
>>Stupid as it sounds, the past few days have been very stressful in
>>to the demo release. I've got about 25 guys in my clan whom are all
>>dedicated to the clan and our chosen game, plus the literally
>>hundreds of
>>regulars from the bfv server, all whom stand to be impacted by
>>these issues.
>>Sure, I'm doing it to have fun cos that's what it all boils down
>>to, but
>>this whole situation is just bad for everyone including EA.
>>It's _not_ going to raise their sales, if anything it will in fact
>>them. No average joe-noob's going to be able to afford their own
>>server, and
>>well I guess we'll see how long EA's servers hold any thread of
>>organization/order..Normally, the average joe-noob can turn to the
>>quality, constantly administrated clan servers but folks can only
>>be stepped
>>on so many times before they say enough's enough (point passed for
>>many on
>>this list, and many whom are no longer on this list)..Surely these
>>this past week will have shaved some of the private servers off of
>>probably not a whole lot looking at the big picture, but some, and
>>no reason to do so.
>>At the end of this, I really think there will remain no "winner".
>>EA will
>>have the final say/action on it aside from folks dropping their
>>games, but I
>>really can't see it turning out positive for them, us, or the average
>>It's a losing battle for all sides.
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Neal Clayton [mailto:xayd at vae-victus.org]
>>Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 11:42 PM
>>To: bf1942 at icculus.org
>>Subject: Re: [bf1942] Ban email
>>actually what really went through was better proof read, I added
>>text" before "python server config files" as well, but it's late and i
>>forgot to copy/paste before submitting, bleh.
>>all this reading of forums and mailing lists at work makes life hard i
>>tell ya, i need a vacation.
>>Joe wrote:
>>>Swapped uncommented/commented but close enough. ;)
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Neal Clayton [mailto:xayd at vae-victus.org]
>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 11:34 PM
>>>To: bf1942 at icculus.org
>>>Subject: Re: [bf1942] Ban email
>>>just submitted..
>>>EA: BF2 server configuration is "hacking"
>>>EA has started <a
>>>IPs of
>>>privately hosted BF2 demo servers from the Gamespy public server
>>>list if
>>>the servers were changed to remove demo-specific time limits and
>>>restrictions on in-game weapons that EA wanted to keep exclusive to
>>>their in house servers.  The catch?  The changes in question were
>>>settings in the server's python server config files that only had
>>>to be
>>>uncommented to be used, and there was no EULA or TOS distributed with
>>>the Linux server to violate <a
>>>href="http://forum.eagames.co.uk/viewtopic.php? p=7046&highlight=#7046">per
>>>a user on the EA Games UK public forum</a>.
>>>Joe wrote:
>>>>I second that.
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: Michael Ressen [mailto:netadmin at michiganburbs.com]
>>>>Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2005 7:50 PM
>>>>To: bf1942 at icculus.org
>>>>Subject: Re: [bf1942] Ban email
>>>>Joe wrote:
>>>>>Broadbandreports and many other sites are running front-page
>>>>>mentions of
>>>>>this horsecrap. Maybe that will get EA's attention..
>>>>Someone get this up on Slashdot.

More information about the Bf1942 mailing list