What is your opinion on the BF2 engine?

[Tofurkeymeister]

Hi everyone! This is my first time posting,but I have played PR for little while. I was just wondering everyone's opinion on the BF2 gaming engine. I have heard that is horrible for modding, and that the only reason it is used is for its team-play capability. Is this true?

[=Romagnolo=]

It is good because it has support for a good ammount of players.

It is bad because most of cool stuffs that we could add in the game *coff*fast-ropes*coff* are hardcoded.

[Spec]

Another poll.

The BF2 engine is the only one thats useful for PR and populated. But i wouldnt call it good.

[Zimmer]

it has the right features but is a modders nightmare.

[Mosquill]

I think it's a very good engine with very limited modding capabilities. Its physics are amazing for a multiplayer game.

[Airsoft]

I like it because one of the better games that in which you are a able to be to drive plaines, helichoppers, and vehikles.

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

We're all still playing it almost 3 years after it's release, right?

[Eddiereyes909]

whats the point of this thread?

If its to prove the BF2 engine sucks, then we all know that. However it has some positives things too. Like a chain of command, and a nice player size.

[Deadfast]

The only reason why I even give a damn about BF2 engine is PR

[00SoldierofFortune00]

whats the point of this thread?

If its to prove the BF2 engine sucks, then we all know that. However it has some positives things too. Like a chain of command, and a nice player size.

The engine doesn't get enough credit. What other engines has squads, CO, specialized kits, destructable objects, air, land, and sea vehicles, huge maps, HALOing, artillery, etc.


It maybe a hard map for beginners to mod unlike the Source Engine, but look how far the DEVs for not just PR, but all the other mods have taken the engine. Sure, somethings like fastropping cannot be enabled ingame, but I would much rather have rallypoints and suppression effects over a silly fastrope.


People thought the ArmA engine would be the ultimate engine for realism and all, but we all know how that turned out.

[LeoBloom.]

I think it's a very good engine with very limited modding capabilities.

Seems like the best description to sum it up.

I would much rather have rallypoints and suppression effects over a silly fastrope.

Exactly.

People thought the ArmA engine would be the ultimate engine for realism and all, but we all know how that turned out.

Hmmf? Wat meenz u by dis?

[00SoldierofFortune00]

Hmmf? Wat meenz u by dis?

Back before ArmA was going to be released, a good portion of the community were saying that ArmA w/modding would be the next PR and because the engine was superior (from the videos), that people should move to ArmA and maybe even PR. It turned out that the engine needed too many resources and wasn't that good after all.

[BloodBane611]

Every engine has it's limitations. A lot of things that would help PR out are iether really chalennging or completely impossible to implement, but the basic structure is better than almost any other engine for implementing PR. It's just the more advanced stuff that it isn't as good at.

It maybe a hard map for beginners to mod unlike the Source Engine

I would disagree with this. As long as you only want to make very small and basic changes it's not hard to mod at all, in fact it was designed that way. But to make the changes necessary for a mod like PR is, obviously, quite challenging.

[ZZEZ]

One of the best engines to date supporting multiplayer..do you know any other engine that offers built-in squad system with voip, 64p, air/land/sea vehicle combat, big selection of weapons, specialized roles[medic/engineer etc]and relatively good graphics for a game that has nearly 3 years?

Hell, some features that BF2 has ArmA doesn't..BF2's engine is a good one but trying to change it can result in allot of headpain because it was built specifically for arcade gameplay without big consideration for modifications, I doubt EA or Dice expected people to play this game for so long.

[Jester_Prince]

I owned Operation flashj point and Arma long before i owned BF2... I got frustraited with them and with being shot from a mile off because

a) the worlds were empty and provided no cover

b) the ai was ungodly unforgiving and would spot you miles off.

c) the multiplayer was slow, the VOIP sucked and it was gerneraly no fun


I baught BF2 specificaly to play PR, I havnt even tried the original bf2 online (though i played BF2142 for a long while so i can image what its like), and I dont belive I ever will, however the engine allows for good amounts of cover and detail in the world, even small mounds of earth that are not possible in ARMA provide cover in PR and therefore the game is less frustrating (no random headshots from 600m from a guy with an AK)

BF2 as a game is flawed its engine is not, the gameplay is faster then ARMA but more forgiving.

BF2's engine is superior to armas in so many ways, not least of all its fun factor.

PR still makes me grin when i have a good round, ARMA just makes me want to throw things...namley the disk. PR wouldnt be the same on any other engine i dont think, if it was on steam it would be a Counterstrike knock off, arma it would be frustraiting as hell, quake wars is perhaps the only other engine i could see it on but i dont know how mod able that is. I dont really know of any other decently modable multiplayer games there are.

[Vaiski]

It’s an 'ok' mod platform if you want to create a booster pack style mod where you mostly add new weapons and do some slight damage value adjustments. However it is horrible if you want to do anything beyond that.
I’m extremely frustrated with the engine. Infact I pretty much hate it with passion.

Okay the good things I see are
Squad system – Which is completely hard-coded and can’t be changed in any way.
Voip – Hardcoded aswell
64 players – Good but we don’t have access to any network side things. We can’t for example try to optimize it to handle 128 players
Vehicles – Goody but hardly a problem to code on more flexible platforms

I’d much prefer a platform that doesn’t set such limits to things that can be done. I’d be happy to code our very own squad system with a custom build voip instead of having a completely hard coded squad system.

The saddest thing with BF2 is that there were extremely good mod teams that build high quality stuff for the BF2 platform. Many of the teams actually published their mod which IMO is a sign of commitment.
Many of those teams are now dead.

Well I know I’m not going to mod BF3... I’ve learnt my lesson …

[Vaiski]

^

And that was from modders point of view. It was build around BF2 specs and does its job for them extremely well. People like the game and it is still one of the most played multiplayer shooter in the market.
It’s just that they could have dropped the modding capabilities out alltogether instead of implementing them just partly.

[Drude]

BF2 is one of the worst :< Too bad it has the best mod there is.


1. Engine limitations for modding.
2. Lagging menu.
3. No queuing system for the servers and you cannot look search for m8's..
4. You can bind only one key without alternatives.
5. PB+BF2 is causing a lots of problems for honest players.

I think Valve's source has the best menu/mp-managing system there is but Source engine lacks of good mods. Insurgency is a good one but it is spoiled with those CS:S sized maps and gameplay :<

What BF2 holds as good thins are the squad system, overview map (- how you point on things from there) and "good feeling" to inf and veh controls.