Battlefield 2142

Nub · Post by **Nub** » 2006-02-19 03:47pm

EA's and Digital Illusions' next instalment in the Battlefield series looks like it'll be set in the future.

Hints about a new Battlefield sequel have been dropped by Dan Blackstone, senior producer on console game Battlefield 2: Modern Combat. In a recent interview with website Shacknews, Blackstone promised that "something very big" is shortly to be announced in regard to the series and went on to offer a cryptic clue about what's to be unveiled.

"One other interviewer asked this [as in, what's next for the Battlefield series] and I gave him a hint, so it's only fair that I do the same for you: 3213/3X2. Or said another way: S.R. 4588164," Blackstone said.

Subsequent to the appearance of this cryptic clue, a couple of maths geniuses have wrestled with the numbers to reveal that '3213/3X2' works out as '2142' and that 'S.R. 4588164' (S.R. standing for 'square root') also works out as '2142'. It's virtually concrete information that EA and Digital Illusions are planning Battlefield 2142 - but of course we'll have to wait for an official word.

Not exactly the trickiest of clues... the couple of 'maths geniuses' should probably be spending their time elsewhere. Either way, I'm not sure what I think about the whole thing if it turns out to be true. I've never really liked futuristic shooters, but I've always loved BF games.

We'll see where this goes I guess.

Edit: Forgot to link the article.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2006-02-19 04:03pm

Math geniuses.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2006-02-19 04:55pm

I get a strong feeling that EA’s idea of what war of the future will be will like is going to be damn stupid. But its not a bad idea.

Fire Fly · Post by **Fire Fly** » 2006-02-19 04:57pm

Jesus, they sure do pump out games rather fast. BF2 was just released last summer and now they've already gotten an expansion pack out, another one in a few days, a third yet and this future-esque FPS. I finally understand now why people keep saying that EA is the Microsoft of video games.

Nub · Post by **Nub** » 2006-02-19 05:03pm

Fire Fly wrote:Jesus, they sure do pump out games rather fast. BF2 was just released last summer and now they've already gotten an expansion pack out, another one in a few days, a third yet and this future-esque FPS. I finally understand now why people keep saying that EA is the Microsoft of video games.

I haven't bought the expansion yet, and if I do I'll most certainly feel dirty. EA knows how to take from my wallet. I hate doing it, but I know that I'll just end up buying the expansion and booster packs in the end.

Just as Sea Skimmer said though, I have my doubts towards EA's interperatation of futuristic warfare. I just hope that they don't go too far into the sci-fi aspect and keep things remotely recognizable.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2006-02-19 05:08pm

Hopefully this will use a new engine (such as the latest Renderware, EA's in house engine, which looks pretty damn good in MoH: Airborne and is multiplatform), and not that piece of shit bloatware they call an engine that powers BF2.

As for the game itself, a 'leaked' video (and probably not all that legit) showed mechs walking down a street.

Shogoki · Post by **Shogoki** » 2006-02-19 07:10pm

How is the BF2 engine bloat ware? I dont know any other engine where you can have half as much stuff going on at the same time with that many players and such good physics modeling (that the physics are not 100% realistic is besides the point, they can be tweeked) with such low pings (30 is my average on 32 player servers, that's like, Doom 3 pings, only with a shitload of players using, planes, boats and cars, each with unique properties ,randomly).

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2006-02-19 08:05pm

Shogoki wrote:How is the BF2 engine bloat ware? I dont know any other engine where you can have half as much stuff going on at the same time with that many players and such good physics modeling (that the physics are not 100% realistic is besides the point, they can be tweeked) with such low pings (30 is my average on 32 player servers, that's like, Doom 3 pings, only with a shitload of players using, planes, boats and cars, each with unique properties ,randomly).

The netcode in BF2 is good, but it needs to be improved to deal with the 250 ms ping player that bogs the game down for all the 20 ms pingers. However, the graphics engine is a fucking hog, and games like Doom3 and Half Life 2 (and hell, even Far Cry) can give equally impressive graphics without needing 2 gigs of RAM to run everything at full. I actually think its the same engine used for 1942 and Vietnam, but modified to handle shaders and higher res art.

Shogoki · Post by **Shogoki** » 2006-02-19 09:04pm

Do you realize the memory requirement is due to the amount of players, actions, physics and object interaction that goes around simultaniously, not due to the graphics? BF is one of the those games that are actually cpu and memory bound, rather than gpu bound, and if you're talking single player, 32 AI's capable of using every single object and weapon around is pretty process intensive. Im not sure what you're talking about, i've never lagged when im pinging 20-30 and playing with players in the 300's.

When you lag with low pings it's because the server is trying to put more people in the game than it can handle, due to the server itself having a wimpy internet connection not capable of handling the game's real time data transfer.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2006-02-19 10:25pm

Shogoki wrote:Do you realize the memory requirement is due to the amount of players, actions, physics and object interaction that goes around simultaniously, not due to the graphics? BF is one of the those games that are actually cpu and memory bound, rather than gpu bound, and if you're talking single player, 32 AI's capable of using every single object and weapon around is pretty process intensive.

Sorry, the memory requirement is NOT due to the number of players - its solely the graphics. A three person LAN game (no bots) and a 64 player game use the same amount of RAM - I've tested with my coworkers, playing against them, and then showing them on online game afterwards. And because their machines were having page thrashing problems, I had taskmanager up on my second monitor throughout the whole game. Furthermore, my coworkers tried several different graphics settings, trying to get a best fit for their one gig machines, with task manager up on their second monitors (yes, we all have dual montiors at work), and the difference between detail settings was amazing - I'm talking hundreds of megabytes. I don't know how the hell DICE programmed their graphics engine, but it is far from optimial, and its gotten worse with the SF night maps (which I haven't tried with the new patch, but I doubt its helped much).

Im not sure what you're talking about, i've never lagged when im pinging 20-30 and playing with players in the 300's.

When you lag with low pings it's because the server is trying to put more people in the game than it can handle, due to the server itself having a wimpy internet connection not capable of handling the game's real time data transfer.

Then you must not play much. I've gone to my favorite servers, such as NAEA, La Cantina, AOD and a couple of others, all of which support 50 to 64 players. When everyone has low pings, the game is smooth as silk. Get one or two people on there about 200/250, and it starts to affect everyone, to the point people start bitching for the high ping players to leave or get kicked. Once they're gone, the game run fine. Hell, I've seen this problem on BS's 16 player server!

wautd · Post by **wautd** » 2006-02-20 02:42am

Arrow wrote: As for the game itself, a 'leaked' video (and probably not all that legit) showed mechs walking down a street.

Goddammit I knew it. Why does there always have to be fucking mechs

Brother-Captain Gaius · Post by **Brother-Captain Gaius** » 2006-02-20 02:54am

Generally I'd agree, but frankly I'd kill for a Classic BattleTech 3050 BF-style game.

Nub · Post by **Nub** » 2006-02-20 02:57am

wautd wrote:
Arrow wrote: As for the game itself, a 'leaked' video (and probably not all that legit) showed mechs walking down a street.
Goddammit I knew it. Why does there always have to be fucking mechs

I really hope that there aren't any mechs myself.

What I'm imagining is if technologically advanced aliens simply did some touch ups on the weapons and equipment used in Battlefield 2. In my eyes that could be pretty cool.

InnocentBystander · Post by **InnocentBystander** » 2006-02-20 04:19am

I'd like spaceships, take the fight onto spaceships, which themselves are fighting; similar, perhaps, to Galactic Conquest mod for 1942; but with ships that last a lot longer, and better integration of fighters and boarding.

Still waiting on Eternal-Silence to deliver, but Dice might have it done first if they start now

GuppyShark · Post by **GuppyShark** » 2006-02-22 02:26am

Or, you know, Battlefront 2

Chris OFarrell · Post by **Chris OFarrell** » 2006-02-22 03:56am

Arrow wrote:
Then you must not play much. I've gone to my favorite servers, such as NAEA, La Cantina, AOD and a couple of others, all of which support 50 to 64 players. When everyone has low pings, the game is smooth as silk. Get one or two people on there about 200/250, and it starts to affect everyone, to the point people start bitching for the high ping players to leave or get kicked. Once they're gone, the game run fine. Hell, I've seen this problem on BS's 16 player server!

I've seen nothing of the sort and I play quite a LOT on servers with a ping < 20, but with other players in the 200-300-350 range. And I don't notice problems.

Brother-Captain Gaius · Post by **Brother-Captain Gaius** » 2006-02-22 04:13am

Chris OFarrell wrote:I've seen nothing of the sort and I play quite a LOT on servers with a ping < 20, but with other players in the 200-300-350 range. And I don't notice problems.

Ditto.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2006-02-22 04:28am

wautd wrote:
Arrow wrote: As for the game itself, a 'leaked' video (and probably not all that legit) showed mechs walking down a street.
Goddammit I knew it. Why does there always have to be fucking mechs

Because it's the FUTURE!!

Although I don't know why the FUTURE!! has to always mean mechs.

Dooey Jo · Post by **Dooey Jo** » 2006-02-22 04:54am

Ha! Dice and their Battlefields have become quite the running joke around here at the university

And apparently, some of the code in BF they threw together the same week as it was released and it did not follow the same standard as most of the rest of the code. So I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't all that well coded.
(This isn't a rumor, BTW. Some of the programmers from Dice actually said this. The running joke about them is that they can't stop talking about Battlefield)

DPDarkPrimus · Post by **DPDarkPrimus** » 2006-02-22 05:00am

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:
wautd wrote:
Arrow wrote: As for the game itself, a 'leaked' video (and probably not all that legit) showed mechs walking down a street.
Goddammit I knew it. Why does there always have to be fucking mechs
Because it's the FUTURE!!

Although I don't know why the FUTURE!! has to always mean mechs.

I'll wait for Battlefield 401942. Dreadnoughts, baby!

Brother-Captain Gaius · Post by **Brother-Captain Gaius** » 2006-02-22 05:03am

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I'll wait for Battlefield 401942. Dreadnoughts, baby!

You got one too many digits there.

WyrdNyrd · Post by **WyrdNyrd** » 2006-02-22 06:07am

Well, it will be interesting to see if they do something vaguely recogniseable, or if they will simply do yet another lame sci-fi Doom/UT rip-off.

If they were making "2042", it would probably be the former, but since it's "2142", probably the latter.

Meh, why am I even commenting? I don't play online games, thanks to my country's expensive, low quality 'net connections. In fact, I hate you all for having the ability to play online!

Jawawithagun · Post by **Jawawithagun** » 2006-02-22 09:13am

DPDarkPrimus wrote:I'll wait for Battlefield 401942. Dreadnoughts, baby!

Personally I won't get excited until they announce BF1066.

Arrow · Post by **Arrow** » 2006-02-22 09:16am

Brother-Captain Gaius wrote:
Chris OFarrell wrote:I've seen nothing of the sort and I play quite a LOT on servers with a ping < 20, but with other players in the 200-300-350 range. And I don't notice problems.
Ditto.

Well, I've seen it several times, and I know several others on those servers saw it as well. I have no idea why you two haven't seen this.

VT-16 · Post by **VT-16** » 2006-02-22 12:48pm

Meanwhile, I'll be awaiting Forgotten Hope's BF2 WWII mod. You know, the one with the war that actually happened?

Seriously, now it's "Terrorists with tanks from China!!11", next is gonna be "Aliens with hover-mechs from United Communist Korea!!!111"

Spare me. :P