BFBC2: Single Player, Server Rental, Beta

So it’s about time we caught up with what’s going on with Battlefield: Bad Company 2, since the multiplayer footage has seemed so solid. DICE have coughed up a single player trailer (below), which is all very spectacular, but kind of predictable in that military-hardware porn with a rock soundtrack that we’re kind of getting over-familiar with now. Anyway, there are a couple of other bits of news that might be of interest. The first is that despite bleating about their dedicated server support when the stuff about Modern Warfare 2’s atrocious online service came to light, those dedicated servers can, apparently, only be rented from DICE’s pre-approved partners. Setting up your own server if you happen to have a host-capable box won’t be an option. So it’s better than the MW2 situation, but it’s still not great. The multiplayer beta for PC begins on the 28th, so we will at least be able to take a look at these approved partners – which are the usual suspects of mass games server hosting – and see how their options hold up.


  1. Mr.Bigglesworth says:

    DICE, i am dissapoint |:-|

  2. Ashen says:

    Mission statement: find a way to monetize every single thing we can.

  3. Heliocentric says:

    Dedicated servers only from partners forever or only during the beta? Because i’d understand them witholding beta server code.

    If not? High horse denied, that is not equal to mw2, but is still bullshit.

    By the way, am i the only one who doesn’t care about singleplayer shooters anymore. I barely even finished halflife 2 episode 2 which was at its greatest toward the end when it emulated multiplayer.

    I’ll tell you what, if you need to hire partner servers for battlefield 3 that can go to hell as well.

    • VHATI says:

      i guess you dont care about unlocks in bf2142 and bf2, because that was how you got them. Playing on rented Dice approved servers. What makes you think that BC2 and BF3 or BF1943 wont have the exact same.

    • Shalrath says:

      I don’t care about that, well didn’t, am I allowed to call this stupid now?

    • Flint says:

      I’m the complete opposite, tired of the constant push of the multiplayer bit and endlessly waiting for the next Great Single-Player FPS Experience.

    • Azradesh says:

      @ Flint
      Agree, multiplayer gaming can get it’s filthy mitts off my single player games please. :D

    • Vinraith says:


      Thirded. I was never that fond of MP shooters to begin with, and at this point I’ve lost all taste for them. A good SP shooter, though, is a wonderful and rare thing.

    • Bonedwarf says:

      TF2 is the most fun I’ve ever had playing games online, and I doubt anything will ever top it.

      I have no interest in multiplayer in almost any other game. I’m sick of multiplayer being an excuse for piss poor AI etc… Devs spend so much more time on their netcode than the single player experience these days it seems.

    • invisiblejesus says:

      More or less in the same boat with Bonedwarf, here; I play a couple other multiplayer games besides TF2 but they really have to have something to hook me and get me interested. I’ve made it a rule now whenever I’m even looking at a multiplayer game to stop and think “Why would I play this instead of TF2?” Since I made that rule, I don’t think anything besides L4D2 and Madballs has passed.

    • SanguineAngel says:

      With you 1000% there buddy.

    • Chaz says:

      Yep I’m in like Flint too, not much interest in plain MP shooters these days and love my well crafted single player experiences.

    • FRIENDLYUNIT says:

      Wee-ll… I love my single player games, tis true. But when it comes to a FPS I prefer to play a good MP. You just cant replicate the goodness and variation you get (Oh not from games like Quake, obviously. I’m talking games with a bit more texture.)

      A SP FPS has to be really special to not be a drag to play (IMHO) these days. Having said that I’m looking forward to playing BFBC2’s and hope I will be pleasantly surprised.

  4. Skusey says:

    It’s a good job that the multiplayer looks so good because nobody would look at that trailer and want to do anything but kick some imagination into the devs.

    • duel says:

      I dunno, looked pretty exciting to me.

    • Alexander Norris says:

      It was a like every military cliché ever combined into one trailer.

      Gratuitous swearing! Edgy rock! Breaches of the Geneva convention because “this is off the record!”

    • Vitamin Powered says:

      Yeah, it almost felt like a “Well, if MW2 can do it, so can we!” approach to game design. I fully expect a “No lunchbox” level where you have to shoot up a school, set immediately after the level where skydive at that plane.

    • Premium User Badge

      Maltose says:

      Besides the minefield, I didn’t see anything that was particularly illegal.

  5. Tei says:

    Is like we (PC gamers) are doomed to our “daily minute of rage”, like in 1984.

  6. alseT says:

    I think this is what happened with BF2 and BF2142 as well. They only released server files after ~6 months so this is standard practice for DICE. Just throwing it out there, don’t let me stifle the internet rage machine.

  7. SirKicksalot says:

    Don’t most people rent servers anyway? And aren’t these “partner” servers the only ones ranked in BF2 and 2141?

  8. VHATI says:

    99% Of the population rents and plays on ranked servers.

    Go look at how many unranked servers sit empty at all times in bf2 and bf2142.

    I am more disappointed they axed prone in the PC version after saying they would have it.

    Ranked servers are the only way to unlock stuff in bf2 and bf2142 also. So pretty much nothing has changed in that regard.

    • po says:

      Wrong. Long time BF2 player and server admin here, and the unlocks were only unavailable for a short while on unranked servers. Now you can unlock everything for immediate use. And there’s nothing to stop you using your own ranking system on a private server.

    • Blather Bob says:

      @VHATI: Do more people play on ranked servers than unranked servers plus servers running mods? Because even if people figure out how to mod BC2, the requirement for all servers to be rented, official, trusted servers will mean mods will be p2p only. But maybe mods aren’t as popular as they were with BF1942?

    • Shalrath says:

      Considering DICE exists as a company releasing actual game titles BECAUSE of the mod to 1942 they made, this stings of insane hypocrisy.

    • PleasingFungus says:

      Shalrath: Who is “they”? Because DICE made BF1942. So… not quite certain what mod you’re attributing their survival to, or why. (Desert Combat…?)

  9. Blather Bob says:

    My favourite part of their backpedalling on PC support was how when they announced there would be no dev console, they said it was a good thing because it would cut down on cheating.

    No word on whether the config files will be encrypted to stop the hackers from using those as a backdoor dev console :P

  10. Gnarl says:

    As people point out, not that different from before.

    And I don’t imagine that difficult to get around if you wanted, anyway.

  11. Davee says:

    Why, DICE? WHY?! I trusted you! You talked about how you were going to keep to the classic server and modding setups, but this… THIS. Shame.

    Now that the rant is over (and yes, I am slightly disappointed at them for this, and hopefully it was only concerning Beta), the MP-bits are looking solid. And Like Helio, the SP-part dosn’t interest me as much.
    Hope I’ll get myself a Beta Key.

    EDIT: No prone? Really? Whoa, there goes a bit of my expectations for BC2…

  12. Gunrun says:

    I loved prone in BF2 it certainly made every fight super exciting
    *spots an enemy*
    *both of us prone*
    *fires bursts untill someone dies*

    Failure to comply with the above and for instance trying to get to cover resulted in death btw.

    And as stated above this is what BF2 and 2142 were like, except those had server files for unranked servers, that were always empty and laggy and horrible.

    • Koozer says:

      No prone was the only thing I wasn’t liking about BC2. Thanks for reminding me of what it did to BF2 and 2142.


    • Nick says:

      To be fair they fixed it to an extent in 2142 where it messed your accuracy up going prone for a while. In that case it was much better to crouch and gun the prone person down.

    • Funky Badger says:

      Curse those realistic combats.

      And anyway, why weren’t you ina tank, son?

  13. StalinsGhost says:

    The Queens of the Stone Age are not just “a rock soundtrack”.

    They’re an awesome rock soundtrack.

    • Rei Onryou says:

      StalinsGhost wins! PERFECT!!!

    • Glove says:

      I love you, StalinsGhost. But not as much as I love QOTSA, sorry.

      To be honest, I’m really surprised and a little sad it took that many posts before someone mentioned them.

  14. Monkeybreadman says:

    Its always been like this with their servers. Dont know what everyone is crying DEATH TO DICE for. Apparently they dont make any money from the way they provide servers, its merely to control the conditions for ranked play so the leaderboards are kept clean (HAHAHAHAHA). Trusted providers have to limit access to the servers so the user can only change basic configs.

    And who is going to host a 32 man ranked server on their own machine?

    I’d rather have this than NO dedicated servers.

    And the trailer hits all the right buttons

  15. Duck says:

    Excuse me everyone, but there are a couple things we need to correct.

    Firstly, the “you can only play on servers rented from us” thing is exactly the same as BF2. So, not a negative.

    Secondly, that isn’t the only thing they said. In their release of beta information, they stated that Bad Company 2 would have NO MOD TOOLS (I HATE YOU DICE), NO PRONE, and PUNKBUSTER IS MANDATORY.

    Obviously, despite all of DICE’s ramblings, it is the EXACT SAME SITUATION as Modern Warfare 2, and shame on them for fooling everyone into thinking otherwise.

    The only positive is that at least there is an actual server list, with reliable servers, compared to MW2’s horrible, horrible peer-to-peer connection system, which has been broken even more by the latest patch. Every other “server” I join in MW2 ends in a timed out connection, because the latest patch causes hosts who host more than one round consecutively to crash during the map loading screen.

    • armlesscorps says:

      It isnt the same as MW2, because it has dedicated servers, whereas MW2 was locally hosted by one of the players. The difference is big and its what they said it was all along , they have dedicated servers and mw2 doesnt. Although they are still going back on the prone thing which is lame and idiotic. Still prefer if we could just have the usual dedicated server option like the games pre-mw2, because it worked fine.

  16. Jahkaivah says:


  17. Quercus says:

    Moneybreadman: No, it has not always been like this. BF2 was the first game to introduce “ranked” servers and while they have always had severe restrictions placed on them (including the limitation of trusted hosts – which means more expense), you did have the option of running unranked servers using the normal dedicated server tools using any machine (whether another serer rental provider or your own rig for a lan game for example).

  18. Mike says:

    This is also interesting:

    Mod Tools: There will not be mod tools for BFBC2. However a majority of the the games logic is controlled by the server and there will be Serverside control options for the dedicated servers.

    • Blather Blob says:

      @Mike: If that quote is PR speak for “there’s no mod support, but you can still toggle friendly fire”, it deserves an award.

  19. Y3k-Bug says:

    The multiplayer of this game is extremely compelling. Give the beta a shot guys, it was amazing in the PS3 Beta, and they’ve done a TON of fixes since then.

  20. l1ddl3monkey says:

    That particular Queens of the Stone Age track in will sell me pretty much anything.

    Even Call of Modern Battlefield Warfare Duty Part 2, or whatever the fuck that up there is.

    • StalinsGhost says:

      Same, frankly.

      Spineless, I know.

    • Rei Onryou says:

      Scientific study shows that QotSA sells 150,000,000% more video games than Marilyn Manson. FACT!

    • invisiblejesus says:

      Proving that the game-selling strategy is to pass on The New Shit, in favor of The Kind Of Old But Not As Old As Metallica, But Obscure Enough It Might Seem New If You’re Under 25 Shit.

  21. Vhati says:

    Wow. Dice must have looked at the server list and noticed that unranked play was not being used at all, or very little, pretty much solely used by pirated copies bypassing the login.

    Why support something that is not being used?

    Is it really so bad that those playing on an unranked server now play on a ranked server? Absolutely nothing in this regard has changed.

  22. Jad says:

    Its so weird that whenever some company does some really rage-worthy stuff and some merely annoying things, all the angry internet people latch onto the annoying part and ignore the real problem (see: DRM who-cares installation limits vs. you’re-only-renting-this-game online authentication schemes).

    Anyway, who cares where you’re getting these servers from or who’s making money off them, the more important thing is NO MODDING. “Approved partners” servers does not have to mean loss of control over your servers — but in this case, for no reason, it does.

    • Vhati says:

      The modding issue is rather minor. This isnt a highly moddable game like fallout or oblivion etc, with a huge active community. Basically there have been only a few notable mods that have come out and experienced by relatively few people.

      Unlike say, MW with huge mapping and community mods like Tactical realism etc. Battlefield has never done those.

      The main reason we dont have mod tools though, is this is an entirely new engine. Not to mention entirely destructable environments. Imagine modders having to design all that stuff. Impossibly long for a mod team.

      Maybe, just maybe we will have mod tools available to BF3. The engine might tuned enough by then. To many people dont look at the big picture and simply rage because thier FOV is merely 45.

    • Jon says:

      I take it you’re ignoring Project Reality, Sandbox Mod and the numerous balance mods then.
      The ability to turn BF2 into Arma, Garry’s Mod or a fun game were quite nice thank you very much.

    • Jad says:

      Modding does not mean big total conversions or new maps necessarily. I see people on this thread complaining about the lack of prone. That is the kind of thing that, with a good SDK, I would think could be modded in without requiring lots of new assets or coding.

      But without mod tools, you will be playing the game exactly as the developers made it, good and bad. Just as if you were on a locked-down console.

      Now, you might be right about this not being a big deal for a Battlefield game. I’ve got very little experience with the series, a tiny bit of 1942 and some time with Vietnam are the extent of my experiences.

      With the slow death of mods the things I’ve missed the most is not the huge TCs, but the little tweaks and fixes that the community made. In other media you consume the product exactly as the creator intended. Consoles follow this pattern. But the PC world has been different, there’s been more interaction with the game, not just in the game. And if the PC community decides that, no, my space marine will duct-tape a flashlight to his assault rifle, no matter what id says, then it happens. No such possibility will exist for BF:BC2.

      Anyway, that’s my little rant.

    • Lilliput King says:

      “because thier FOV is merely 45”

      Is this quote accurate?

      It’d be like looking through a tube.

    • Vhati says:

      I didnt ignore those mods. You can count the # of mods for battlefield on 2 hands pretty much.

      When a game doesnt allow you to download mods when you connect to a server, it really limits things.

      Killing floor has more mods, l4d has more mods, all the cod games have more mods. Battlefield was never known for its mods. Project reality is fantastic, dont get me wrong, but to put all that work into making mod tools for a game that is not and will not ever be known for its mods is very silly.

      They tried the mod scene, and then found out that it wasnt that popular. Why invest all that time that less than 1% of your fan base is interested in.

  23. PleasingFungus says:

    I remember this being mentioned during the very first mw2 arguments. It was their policy then, too – in their FAQ & all. But few noticed, and they hardly went out of their way to clarify that…

    Also, Tei is right as always. Go Tei!

    • Tei says:

      Thanks. But I can’t live to that standard, I feel I am more wrong than right on most of my comments. Is hard to be a nerd.

      (update: s in “Is” added.)

    • Fumarole says:

      “I hard to be a nerd.”

      Must. Rinse. Brain.

  24. Zeldrin says:

    Oh, it’ll hardly be long before someone hacks one of the servers and grabs the server files for public use.

  25. the wiseass says:

    Ok err… let me get this straight:

    – NO PRONE

    Seriously, what is going on here DICE? Way to show with your tiny fat greasy fingers on Infinity Ward, when in fact making yourself guilty of similar atrocities. Let me guess, the game is not “balanced for prone”? Why is there no outcry of despair from the PC community?

    • TotalBiscuit says:

      Prone is fucking shit, as mentioned above. BF2 combat consisted of

      1) See enemy
      2) Both go prone
      3) Plink away at each other

      If you want prone, play a realistic military sim, not a bombastic game like Battlefield.

      Dev console and unranked private servers are not even close to being a big deal. The PC community isn’t freaking out about it because the majority of them are sensible moderates that don’t sperg out over minor issues, saving their rage for major ones.

    • Lilliput King says:

      Agreed with the whole prone issue. The best players in BF2 adopted some sort of man-fish hybrid playstyle, diving from spot to spot gracefully and terribly.

      It looked pants and played like pants, to be honest.

    • the wiseass says:

      I beg to differ, prone has been absolutely essential for every battlefield game since BF1942! Why change one of the most important game mechanics? I tell you why, to make the game more compatible with consoles and not because it was a bad mechanic. Prone worked fine for every Battlefield game on the PC until now.

      Sorry to say, but if you didn’t like prone, you probably never were a big fan of Battlefield anyway.

    • Psychopomp says:

      No True Scotsman arguments are fun.

    • the wiseass says:

      Maybe, but even considering the other points makes me no want to buy this game anymore. I guess BFBC2 will simply not be the game for me then, oh well. At least I’m not going to boycott IW and endorse the same crap from DICE, that would be hypocrite.

    • Jim Rossignol says:

      Probably worth point out that BFBC2 is not Battlefield 3.

  26. TotalBiscuit says:

    If you really, honestly believe that there is ‘little difference’ between dedicated servers and the abomination that is IWnet, then you might want to go and ask someone who’s experienced the bullshit of watching the bullets they put into their opponent, promptly never have fired on the killcam due to lag.

    It’s like 56k all over again.

    This is not a big deal. Dedicated servers = good. Ranked servers from specific providers = par the course for Battlefield due to ranking and unlocks. And there are modding tools. To what extent they’ll be supported is anyone’s guess, but it’s not enough for me,as a PC gamer, to freak out and call for boycotts.

    • TotalBiscuit says:

      Scrap what I said about modding tools, misread it.

      Still not enough to stop me buying the game. It’s not black and white, it’s shades of grey and this particular shade is an awful lot lighter than MW2s.

    • Phinor says:

      There is a number of problems with partners only dedicated servers but here’s few:

      – There won’t be partners/servers available worldwide. Heck, I’d be willing to bet more than 70% of countries in the world will never see a dedicated server partner company. Sure, the community for BC2 in a random country might be small but it would remain alive for years if they had the opportunity to have a server of their own. Personally I’m worried there might not be partners in Finland and even if there was, they would simply overprice the servers which leads me to:

      – The price. Back when I was hardcore clan player, I remember excellent quality dedicated servers costing like 4-5€ per month and that was considered somewhat fair sum of money. Not that many clans had a server of their own but the few dedicated clans did have. Now I hear the costs are in the 2-3€ PER SLOT per month range. That’s 128-192€ per month for ONE 64 player server. Back in the day the 5€ per month usually granted you two servers, one to use as a public server and the other for clan only private use. Oh and you got a Teamspeak/Ventrilo server too. 100€+ per month should grant you a bit more than a single server with x amount of slots..

      – Somewhat related to the first one but once the community starts growing smaller, the amount of servers rapidly decreases. There are many great games and mods out there with a tight but small community and that game/mod might have only 5-10 servers but every one of those servers mean a lot to the people still playing the game. The reason they have 10 servers is simple: they are hosting their own dedicated servers since no partner in the world is still offering servers for that particular game.

      Ok, sure, neither EA nor DICE wants this game to last 5+ years because that’s all away from their future title sales. But that doesn’t mean partners only dedicated servers is the right choice for customers.

      Anyway, I’m still very much looking forward to BC2. Certainly even partners only dedicated servers is a lot better option than the abomination that is I just hope BC2 isn’t ruined by too small FOV. That’s the only thing that could kill this one for me and based on the console videos, the FOV isn’t too bad. Hopefully it’s even better on PC.

    • Vhati says:

      This is a slight assumption on things for my part, but Look at the ranked server hosters for BF2 and BF2142. I am reasonably sure that some of those and probably new ones are going to be hosting for the new game.

      This isnt the first time that they have had ranked servers, and they seemed to work out well the 2 times.

      BF2 still have an extremely strong community going after all this time, i know because i started playing it again for old times sake instead of bf2142 til bc2 comes out. I makes me realize that bf2 was just so much more fun. way better maps.

      So if you wanna know where servers will be located, for a slight idea just look at where bf2 and bf2142 servers are hosted.

    • Phinor says:

      Yeah that thought came to mind once I posted. There seems to be very few sites offering BF2 servers (in Finland) and I could find only one offering ranked servers. The cost seems to be 2.5€ per slot for ranked servers, which is insane. For unranked slots though, the price dramatically drops down to 1€ per slot range.

      So that right there is another reason why there should be unranked servers aka. dedicated server files. nearly triple price just to get ranked server slots instead of regular slots? I wonder what the situation is now but at least in the past clans wanted specifically unranked servers and price clearly seems to be one of the reasons.

  27. Duck says:

    Hey guys, even with what I said above, I’m still buying this game.

    I still bought Modern Warfare 2, knowing full well all of it’s problems. If you take IWNet out of the equation, you have a really, really great multiplayer game, and that’s what my $60 went for. Even with IWNet, it is still one of the best “arcadey” multiplayer shooter experiences ever.

    Same thing here, so even though there will be no mods, no prone, and horrible, horrible punkbuster, I will still buy Bad Company 2 because it is simply going to be a really great game, regardless of it’s faults.

    As for prone, Bad Company 2 shooting is more like Call of Duty 4/Modern Warfare 2 shooting, which is completely unlike the poor, laggy hit detection in BF2. The actual shooting mechanics are way different, thereby making prone a possibility for good gameplay, and not something like a “dolphin dive” or anything like that.

    • Premium User Badge

      Frosty says:


      I see what you’re saying, but saying “If so and so and so did this it’d be awesome” doesn’t make it awesome.

      $60 seems like a hideously high amount for something that could be really really good if something wasn’t there. Like paying $10 for a really awesome cheese and pickle sandwich only to find out they used budget pickle.

    • VHATI says:

      Prone was cut from PC because they found it didnt work with the game very well. The destructive environment and terrain made prone practically useless, because thier is very little flat terrain. Basically the prone guys end up looking at a rock in front of them.

      The complexity of the environment and levels caused a change of gameplay. You are running up and down through craters, and firing out through holes blown in walls.

      Prone didnt work for BC2. Try it before you knock it.

  28. Premium User Badge

    Frosty says:


    Caps Lock is the fun button.

  29. Duck says:


    “$60 seems like a hideously high amount for something that could be really really good if something wasn’t there. Like paying $10 for a really awesome cheese and pickle sandwich only to find out they used budget pickle.”

    Please read my post again.

    “Even with IWNet, it is still one of the best “arcadey” multiplayer shooter experiences ever.”

    IWNet isn’t as bad nor is it important enough to justify not buying the game if you liked Call of Duty 4.

    As to the rest of your post, I fail to see what about my post was “if so and so did this it’d be awesome”. All I was saying is that A, Mr. Rossignol pointed out the perfectly normal thing as bad, and didn’t even mention the “no mod tools”, which was the actual bad thing, and B, Bad Company 2’s feature-destroying situation is in no way different from Modern Warfare 2’s, and shame on DICE for fooling everyone into thinking otherwise.

    • Vhati says:

      what are you talking about Duck. They are 2 entirely different things.

      lets not even mention the fact that they are actually using dx 10 and 11 for PC games, including getting play with more players.

      In no way shape or form has Dice come close to murdering the online community like IW did.

      DICE is giving plenty of extra support to PC compared to IW which gimped thiers into a Console. Did i hear clan support?

  30. Monolith says:

    @Shalrath: No. DICE existed long before Battlefield 1942 (the company was founded in 1992) and that title was developed entirely by DICE. You’re probably thinking about the Desert Combat mod.

  31. Dominic White says:

    The one thing that puzzles me about that trailer – where’s the humor? The original Bad Company was not a serious game at all. This new one looks like a less paranoid/more comic-bookish version of Modern Warfare 2.

  32. the_fanciest_of_pants says:


    Ummm does Desert Combat ring a bell? a think a few more then 1% of bf1942 players played THAT.. BF2(one could naively argue the entire ongoing series)exists because of it.

    And; “Not to mention entirely destructable environments. Imagine modders having to design all that stuff. Impossibly long for a mod team. ”

    What? You don’t really get how that’s done do you. Sure, making a destructable environment is a challenge to code, but that’s the nice thing about a mod.. it borrows the majority of it’s parent’s code. It’s not rocket surgery making destroyable objects. There’s absolutely no reason why BC2 would be harder to mod then any other modern engine, and that’s a silly, silly example.

    • Vhati says:

      Desert Combat was fun. But it wasnt what made Battlefield. It was popular before and after it.

      You apparently know very little about modding. You have no idea what it takes to create the destructable stuff in Frostbite. None of us do. For all we know, it could take an incredible amount of work, which is probably why the first BC didnt do as much as this one does.

      So far 2 mods have come up. Project reality, and desert combat. Lets hear some of the other incredibly popular ones. Modding was never serious in BF series. Yes a couple fantastic ones did come out, but that was only because of the extreme dedication of those modders.

      No one buys battlefield for the modding like they do oblivion, or neverwinter nights, or morrowind, or crysis.

      I am a huge supporter of modding, battlefields modding community was never going anywhere, just look at the bf2142 mod scene.

    • the wiseass says:

      Those who still remember the fun days of the BF1942 stunt servers KNOW very well how important modding was to the game…

    • Tei says:

      Modding in BF1942 was GREAT. I think i played more hours in Desert Combat than in the main game. And I think I played more BF mods than on any other game (other than Quake1 and maybe Half-Life). Desert Combat is of the importance of Counter-Strike. So saying mods are not importan in BF is like saying mods are not important in HL. RIDICULOUS.

    • HermitUK says:


      You are aware, of course, that 1942 had no SDK on release either, and that it only came along a while after the game had shipped.

    • Tei says:


      I am a oldschool modder. My SDK is a hex editor and a brain, and work for all games. Thats how you add new vehicles to Carmagedoom. But I understand new modders want this to work different, in a less hack / more pro way. Anyway I was just commenting on the hilarious line “the BF modding scene is not important”.

  33. Bweah says:


    Yeah I wonder what happened with the humorous tone. The previous game’s trailers even parodied Rainbow Six and the Gears of War “Mad World” ad.

    Guess they’re trying to make everyone forget they overlooked PC gamers by releasing it on consoles only and try to capitalize on the Modern Warfare 2 replacement angle.

    I’m just hoping for infantry-only maps or very rare vehicles.

    • Funky Badger says:

      Surely the whole point is the TANKS. If you want infantry only play MW/2, surely?

    • Nick says:

      Nah, mass infantry combat was great fun in BF2, when not ruined by noob tubers, dolphin divers and mine/grenade spammers (which was surprisingly often in my experience, thankfully). Some of the greatest games I had were on maps like Karkand and Wetlands with minimal armour. Or indeed on some of the special forces maps.

  34. theleif says:

    This statement is endorsed by The Leif.*

    *Statement being that QOTSA is not just “a rock soundtrack”.

    [Insert general rambling about the reply function not working here]

  35. Duck says:


    “what are you talking about Duck. They are 2 entirely different things.

    lets not even mention the fact that they are actually using dx 10 and 11 for PC games, including getting play with more players.”

    While I like the DX11 support, and having 32 players instead of 24, it’s still a small add-on that could’ve been made by anybody easily, and fits the game properly. It’s not really catering to the PC, it’s just doing something really easy that makes it look like they are catering to the PC. Whereas, in Call of Duty 4, anything over 8v8 was just way too many players for me, and I felt that the player limit was a great addition.

    “In no way shape or form has Dice come close to murdering the online community like IW did.”

    And the only proof you gave me for that statement was the above? Pathetic. Frankly, the lack of mod tools is the worst thing in both games, and is my biggest complaint for BC2. But whatever, I still have Project Reality for BF2.

    “DICE is giving plenty of extra support to PC compared to IW which gimped thiers into a Console. Did i hear clan support?”

    Extra support to PC, as stated earlier, was simply easy stuff they could throw in to draw people who were disgruntled by MW2. If you look at the facts, the PC version of BC2 really is the same as the consoles, with, as Infinity Ward so CLEVERLY stated, “mouse support and in-game text chat”. While that isn’t the worst thing in the world to ME, so it isn’t really a problem to me. However, what my problem is is people who compare the two and find DICE’s ruses to show that they really are making a tailored for PC game, when they aren’t.

  36. Vhati says:

    dx 10 and 11 are not something easy that they can just add on for the pc community. they both require alot of work.

    Just because you feel that anything over 8vs8 was to much for you, doesnt mean that it was for the rest of us. i was playing 32vs32 in it.

    Your complaining about having to rent servers. you dont have to, you can play on someone elses server. You are crying about not being able to mod. well guess what, we have no idea what it would take to create mod tools for this game. for all we know, its not possible. There is not an active mod community that builds the games valley like alot of other games have.

    I dont care if the console version is the same as the pc, as long as both are great and not held back. Which the PC is not, it supports dx10 and dx11, more players. dedicated servers, with the ability to modify the servers. Clan support.

    They kept the single most important part of the game. The community. Get real man

    • Duck says:

      “dx 10 and 11 are not something easy that they can just add on for the pc community. they both require alot of work.”

      DX10 and 11 are also visual-only improvements, thus being not applicable to your argument of “supporting the PC community”. You are equivocating more than Richard Dawkins does when he is interviewed by a science journal.

      “Just because you feel that anything over 8vs8 was to much for you, doesnt mean that it was for the rest of us. i was playing 32vs32 in it.”

      Oh really, you were playing 32v32 in CoD4? Well, you still can’t in Bad Company 2, as the player limit is 16v16, so again, your argument is invalid.

      “Your complaining about having to rent servers. you dont have to, you can play on someone elses server.”

      I’m saying that there is nothing wrong with renting servers, as it’s the same system as was in BF2! And even then, you CAN’T play on someone else’s server, as the server files will not be distributed publicly, which was what the original news post here was about anyway! Are you blind? This shows to everyone that you obviously aren’t reading or understanding my argument, and are either a DICE fanboy or just likes playing devil’s advocate in internet tough-guy fashion.

      “You are crying about not being able to mod. well guess what, we have no idea what it would take to create mod tools for this game.”

      It doesn’t freaking matter whether it would take a lot of work to make mod tools, the point is that mod tools are just as much as part of the PC community as anything, and you are absolutely stupid for thinking that raised player limits and shiny visuals make more for “keeping the PC community” than something so essential as mod tools.

      “There is not an active mod community that builds the games valley like alot of other games have.”

      How do you know, the game isn’t even out yet! If BF2 is anything to go by, there would be a huge amount of mods! Now you are just pulling stuff out of your rear.

      “I dont care if the console version is the same as the pc, as long as both are great and not held back.”

      And this is the icing on the cake, folks. You say that you don’t care if console version is the same as the PC, as long as they aren’t held back. Guess what? Features were not removed from the console version of MW2 to make the PC, they were exactly the same. According to your above sentence, you should have no problem with MW2 then. But yet you do, and this shows your ridiculously contradictory thinking.

      “Which the PC is not, it supports dx10 and dx11, more players. dedicated servers, with the ability to modify the servers.”

      Shiny visuals, more players (but still not 64 players), fake dedicated servers, with the ability to turn friendly fire on or off, does not a PC community make. Are you even listening to yourself?

      Listen, I still bought MW2 and I will still by BC2 because the gameplay is so very great, but this misconception that DICE is not actually pulling an “direct-port to console” scenario ala Infinity Ward needs to be struck down. DICE is only adding these novelty features to lure the disgruntled-at-MW2 folks to themselves. It’s all a show to get more revenue, and I believed them until they said “no mod tools”.

  37. Fell says:

    I was under the impression that most of the respected servers within a multiplayer game were almost always the rented ones. A clan is more likely to rent in the first place because creating a dedicated server on par with a rental is not cost effective versus the rental rate.

    However, now DICE gets to choose what third parties get to rent these servers out, limiting competition.

    But in all reality, how long before the files are leaked/stolen and this is a non issue?

    … On the prone issue:
    Stop trying to equate the lack of prone with a lack of PC support. It doesn’t make any sense.
    It is a simple feature to add or remove; I doubt there are any nefarious goals behind the choice.

    Personally I am glad it is gone, hopefully it will make sniping more of a challenge.

  38. Miles of the Machination says:

    Forget the dedicated servers, WHERE’S MY DAMN JAZZ PIANO?! Matters aside, I don’t think this will be such a problem. Sure player made dedicated servers where prevalent with CoD4, however, there were a lot of ISPs out there offering a lot of server space. So what I imagine will happen (hopefully) is that ISPs recognise the size of this BC2 multiplayer scene and compensate for the considerably less player created servers – good ping, we can still choose our servers. It’s still a ton better than what MW2 was fixed up with.

  39. Kenny says:

    £26.99 + early beta access from

    On it

  40. HermitUK says:

    What amuses me is the announcement about no mod tools for BC2 is nothing new. It was mentioned back November on this podcast: link to

    Their explaination was fair enough as well. Their tools are in a pretty dodgy state at the moment, as they’re only just porting over the engine and tools. To quote one of their devs: “it isn’t likely that we will release mod tools for BC2 as we simply do not have any tools that work in such an environment.

    Currently our work with simplifying the tools are for Frostbite 2 and future games, not for BC2.”

    tl;dr version: they’re currently concentrating on getting the tools usable by the time BF3 comes out. I fail to see why this is a terrible decision.
    Source: link to

  41. Duck says:

    After reading Hermit’s post:

    That makes total sense then, pardon me for blaming them for some nefarious laziness or other reason for not having mod tools. Respect for DICE: +100.

  42. Vhati says:

    Damn im good duck. I called that didnt i. Can i get an apology maybe.

  43. poop says:


    EA: bad company

    Battlefield : bad game


  44. pepper says:

    Its a shame about those servers. It means no modding tools, no mods, no tournament play. Nothing. So in a way its no better then Modern Warfare 2. Why cant these company’s see we dont want to be locked down in there little ways playing the same game and maps all over?

    I still have hope for BF3. Although, it is fading quickly. Maybe DICE should just go for consoles only if they really want to play this way.

    Lets just hope those tools will be better then the BF2 tools(unstable) and more like the UT3 tools(danged solid).

  45. bill says:

    I don’t play battlefield or multiplayer shooters. I don’t care about dedicated servers. But even I knew this months ago.

    I did READ the rps comments thread when the first MW2 vs BFBC2 stuff happened, and even back then comments and the BFBC2 faq said that the servers were only rentals.

    RPS commenters are a very useful source of information.

  46. Serenegoose says:

    In all honesty, what makes this game different to battlefield 3? Isn’t it the same dev/publisher combo? I’m genuinely unsure here, and far too lazy to find out any other way. Though, this is probably more keystrokes than google would have cost me. Oh well.

    • Inferno says:

      Battlefield 3 will probably have horrificly overpowered jets and no singleplayer.

      I’m mucho looking forward to this and considering I and pretty much everyone only played the game on rented servers before (because they are the best and most reliable servers than home made ones) it makes no odds to me.

  47. destroy.all.monsters says:

    That’s fine – one more game off my radar.

  48. dsmart says:

    @ Shalrath says:

    Considering DICE exists as a company releasing actual game titles BECAUSE of the mod to 1942 they made, this stings of insane hypocrisy.


    You’re thinking of the guys that made the Desert Combat mode for BF1942 and who went on to be bought by THQ and made the lackluster Frontlines fps.

  49. fulis says:

    Heard of Desert Combat?

  50. Vhati says:

    BF3 will have much much larger maps, and even more improved version of frostbite engine. Jets and more vehicles. Word is it will also support 128 players(this is just rumor though), up from 64 of the previous games.