GamesRadar has 10 things you need to know about the game.
Then again, if you played the original, all you really need to know is that there's a sequel. The rest will take care of itself.
Mar 10, 2010
BC2 GPU Performance In-depth
TechSpot comes up with some interesting numbers, but the most striking conclusion is this: reducing your graphics settings in Bad Company 2 doesn't help much...
Although Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is a very demanding game, it is not nearly as horrible on hardware as Crysis. For example, at 2560x1600 using maximum visual quality settings with 2xAA/4xAF the Radeon HD 5870 Crossfire setup averaged 74fps in this new game. The exact same hardware averaged just 48fps in Crysis Warhead with AA/AF settings disabled. 2 Another example using the GeForce GTX 260 saw a 47fps average when testing with Battlefield: Bad Company 2 at 1680x1050, while playing Crysis allowed for just 33fps with AA/AF disabled.
Battlefield: Bad Company 2 doesn't scale down very well, as we saw roughly a ~5 fps performance gain when going from the high to the medium quality preset. At the same time, there was very little difference in graphics quality or detail. When going from the medium to the low quality settings we saw anywhere from a 10 – 20fps increase, which allowed graphics cards as slow as the Radeon HD 4830 or GeForce GT 240 to deliver an acceptable level of performance at 1680x1050.
We also tried running some of the slower cards at a 1280x1024 resolution at high and medium settings, but the performance boost was not very significant. Similarly than when going from high to medium, a ~5 fps average increase was noted when decreasing the resolution. Like many first person shooters the CPU doesn't play a huge role in this game's performance, therefore a decent dual-core processor should be enough to power even the latest graphics cards at full speed. As the resolution was increased the game became even more GPU bound, removing the CPU from the equation almost entirely.
BC2 Server Update and EA Maintenance (PC)
From the Battlefield Blog on March 9:
As you probably noticed, we have experienced an outage across EA servers today, this was caused by a routing issue outside of EA's control but it has been solved and things are back up and running again.
Tomorrow at 8:00 GMT/9:00 CET and 12:00 (midnight) PST the EA servers will be brought down for maintenance. There is no current time for when the servers will return so keep an eye on our Twitter for more up to date information as we get it: http://twitter.com/OfficialBFBC2
On a more positive note, we have released the R6 server to server providers today which should stop the PB INIT FAILURE messages that have been causing problems recently, as well as releasing new server versions, we are still investigating and fixing connectivity and stability problems that are being reported in the forums.
New DLC for Mass Effect 2
It's free, but it consists entirely of one weapon:
Attention all Cerberus Network members: The Arc Projector heavy weapon has been deployed for field use.
Ghost Recon: Future Soldier details
For some, Ubisoft's new DRM system is the only detail that matters. For the rest, CVG has some dope:
As the game name suggest, the Ghost team are now packing futuristic gear like stealth cloaks (as seen in the Ghost Recon: Future Soldier trailer), armoured ground drones and exo-skeleton legs (to carry more gear).
The latter in particular is a game changer, as it means the Ghosts are now more agile and can jump, roll and generally throw themselves around the battlefield. It also opens the window for close quarters combat, which you'll be seeing a lot of in Future Soldier.
4-Player drop in, drop out co-op is promised and controversially, no squad commands what-so-ever. Character classes also play a pivotal role in the new game, with players receiving specific, unique bonuses for their chosen role (optical camo for Recon, heart sensors for Snipers, shoulder mounted missiles for Commandos).
Mar 4, 2010
Call of Duty: Legal Warfare
G4TV has been all over the beheadings at Infinity Ward, and it seems the entire gaming press has been glued to the site for days.
For starters, Jason West and Vince Zampella walked (or were escorted) out the door at IW, and went straight over to the legal offices of O'Melveny &; Myers. They're suing Activision for the royalties they're owed, apparently, and for the IP rights to the Call of Duty Modern Warfare part of the franchise:
'Activision has refused to honor the terms of its agreements and is intentionally flouting the fundamental public policy of this State (California) that employers must pay their employees what they have rightfully earned,' said [attorney Robert] Schwartz in [a press] release. 'Instead of thanking, lauding, or just plain paying Jason and Vince for giving Activision the most successful entertainment product ever offered to the public, last month Activision hired lawyers to conduct a pretextual 'investigation' into unstated and unsubstantiated charges of 'insubordination' and 'breach of fiduciary duty,' which then became the grounds for their termination on Monday, March 1st.'
In response to the suit, Activision has released leaked some details on its investigation into West's and Zampella's alleged misconduct. An internal legal memo says the company wants to get its hands on:
- Documents regarding past, current or future IW projects, including but not limited to any and all businesses analyses of future projects (e.g. Modern Warfare 3)
- Documents regarding any potential 'spin out' of IW, including but not limited to any communications with IW employees, West or Zampella regarding forming a new studio independent of Activision
- Documents regarding West and Zampella's communications with Activision's competitors, including but not limited to Electronic Arts
Although Activision says it's still "searching" for this information, they've already got it in one form or another. This leak is just their way of presenting their argument to the public without actually discussing pending litigation. It also sort of looks like they're firing a warning shot over EA's bow, in case the latter has any notions of hiring someone to make a Modern Warfare game.
Don't expect this to be resolved in our lifetimes. Activision has every incentive - and the financial resources - to make this litigation as slow and painful as possible.
Mar 2, 2010
Culling the herd
From Blue's News:
G4tv.com reports on drama at Infinity Ward that includes the apparent departure of studio heads Vince Zampella and Jason West amid allegations of "breaches of contract and insubordination." The story began with G4 reporting that a bunch of "bouncer-types" showed up at the Call of Duty developer's offices following a meeting Activision held with Zampella and West (reportedly the pair were not seen in the offices following the meet). This was followed by Kotaku showing a shot of Jason West's Facebook status reading "Jason West is drinking. Also, no longer employed." Likewise, Jason West's LinkedIn Profile now lists his tenure at Infinity Ward as January 2001 – March 2010. Details on exactly what went down are still vague, but the most significant clue seems to be in an Activision SEC filing stating: "The Company is concluding an internal human resources inquiry into breaches of contract and insubordination by two senior employees at Infinity Ward. This matter is expected to involve the departure of key personnel and litigation. At present, the Company does not expect this matter to have a material impact on the Company."
Jason West is (or was) was Infinity Ward's Chief Technology Officer, President and Chief Operating Officer. Zampella is (or was) Infinity Ward's CEO and CFO. Given that both were significant players in the billion-dollar boondoggle that is Modern Warfare 2 (West in particular is credited with being the game's writer and director), Activision's decision to fire them is rather stunning.
UPDATE: the plot thickens.
James Walker at bingegamer.net apparently has a few sources at Activision who've dished some additional revelations:
1.) Infinity Ward has yet to be paid a single dime in royalties for Modern Warfare 2, which has earned Activision over one billion dollars in revenue. (NOTE: To clarify, everyone who spoke with me mentioned this. Whether or not IW and Activision had an agreement in place for royalty payments is unknown at this time. It’s just curious that everyone brought this up.)
2.) Their current contractual obligation expires in October, which could explain why Activision has (allegedly) been looking to dump Modern Warfare 3 off to another developer. The probem with this is that Infinity Ward still technically owns the rights to the Call of Duty franchise (at least partially). Some people close to the situation see Activision’s current actions as a power play to try and bully Infinity Ward into either staying with Activision in one capacity or another (buyout or contract extension) or to at least acquire the Call of Duty name.
(ED NOTE: If the above paragraph makes zero sense, I apologize. It was 4am EDT, I was writing short-hand and half of what was being told went way over my head. The short of it: There’s a contract in place regarding Infinity Ward’s principals that expires in October. Basically IW, while technically owned by Activision, is autonomous in the same way Blizzard is. That’s what the “contract” talk is about. Again, sorry for any confusion.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)