Talk:Battlefield 2/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Sales

Sales numbers for BF2 have been updated and referenced wrongly. I'm 100% certain that the reference to 11m copies sold is a mistake. The source should almost certainly refer to Bad Company 2 not BF2. Sales numbers used to be in this artice and showed about 3m copies sold in the first 2-3 years after BF2 came out. Theres no way total sales are now 11m Kristmace (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I've made the change using 2 references that I could find. The BBC article used previously is so clearly inaccurate. Theres no way a game sells 2 million copies in its first year then somehow jumps to 11 million a few years later. Kristmace (talk) 11:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

BF2's sales were boosted with the release of Project Reality Mod, and it getting awards. The same way ARMA 2 saw sales' increase with the release of DayZ Mod. --ConCelFan (talk) 12:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I have my doubts that a mod would account for almost 5.5x the sales as the original game, despite the quality and claim of the game. Even the best sellers on PC have a hard time reaching those numbers. See: Minecraft, The Sims, etc. MAGZine (talk) 00:27, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of certain sections

I came to Wikipedia's article on BF2 specifically to check the system requirements... All other game pages I can think of list them, heck, it is even part of the table on the right that lists developer, publisher, release date, etc. Now for a reason I don't understand some people here believe it is not encyclopedic information. I am adding the information back because: 1. All other wikipedia game pages list the system requirements. The table on the right has a dead link to the system requirements part. 2. The articles talk about a reivew in which the reviewer gave a lower score because of the high system requirements. They therefore should be listed. 74.56.12.24

Article content isn't determined by what you were looking for when you first read the article, nor is content stipulated by other articles. Content is determined by policy, in this case the relevant policies are WP:ENC and WP:NOT. Also, suggest you read WP:CONSENSUS. Addhoc 15:47, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree that technical details such as system requirements do not belong here. Official documentation can be found by going to the official website, which is linked at the bottom of the article. Remy B 06:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I think that they do. Maybe you don't think it's important that all wikipedia pages share the same structure. Okay. Maybe you don't mind all other game pages list system requirements. Fine. However, when it is written, in the article, section Reception: "Games Radar approved of the game, awarding a 90%, but added a disclaimer that the gaming experience is best "if your machine is up to it".", I think that listing the system requirements would be valuable information. Furthermore, I have read the policies about what wikipedia is not, and I cannot find in what way it goes against them. Is the consensus really there ? Looking at the history log, I see that you and Remy B were against, but WinterSpw and me are For. What would you say about a vote ? 74.56.12.24

How about we just add on the statement "The system requirements alluded to may be read here," with "here" linking to the official system requirements? I'll be doing this for the time being at the same time the patch section is deleted.--BirdKr 21:51, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the original poster. I agree for the reasons he listed, but to expand slightly on some of them, and to disagree with the second poster, who said "nor is content stipulated by other articles", I believe that Wikipedia needs to show consistency between articles, especially ones of similar topics. The articles for almost every game list the system requirements, and this article should be no exception. I do realise that at the time of this posting, the system requirements are listed, I am simply saying this so that my opinion is down for any future debates. --Sauronjim (talk) 16:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

---

I sense that the patch/update information section will need to go to the trash too--BirdKr 17:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)--BirdKr 17:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Unless if anyone can provide a valid argument in response to the section "Patches" in Archive #2, I will delete the Patch section in 1 week. --BirdKr 09:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

The patches section has been removed on June 21, 2007. --BirdKr 23:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

No in-game screenshot in infantry or vehicle mode

I just realized that we have absolutely no first person screenshot of this first person shooter game. If anyone would like to post one of the screens, please do so in the Gameplay section. I do not have access to Battlefield 2 at the moment, but will post a screenshot if no one else does once I return. --BirdKr 23:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

I can upload one shortly...but I'll have to install the game, as I recently reformatted my PC. elateral 20:49, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Image:Battlefield 2 ss.png How about this one?

I just added 2, one for gameplay and one for the squad screen... I'll add another for the awards section as soon as I install the patch. As for the pic above, go ahead and place it anywhere it makes sense. elateral 22:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

BirdKr,

I would like to add material to the BF2 Wiki page that would interest Wiki readers. I tried to edit a section, add external links, and the edits were rejected by Corpx. Corpx and I have chatted and he recommended talking to other BF2 editors. I want to go through the correct procedures to contribute. Please provide advice to keep me out of trouble.

Sfscriv

Awards and unlockable weapons section needs to be rewritten

Awards and unlockable weapons

One can earn awards (ribbons, badges, and medals) for certain tasks accomplished. Badges and ribbons are the easiest to obtain, and medals are much harder, requiring dedication and prolonged play. As players ascend through the ranks they will gain the ability to unlock certain weapons. For each rank gained after the rank of Private First Class, a player will be granted the ability to unlock one of seven unlockable weapons with the original game, one for each class. Players who have the Special Forces expansion have the option to unlock 7 more weapons, 2 weapons per each promotion after sergeant. This system has players who have not purchased the expansion at a disadvantage with regard to weapon availability on servers which allow use of unlocked weapons. For each kit, however, in order to unlock the Special Forces weapon one must first unlock the "Vanilla" weapon. For instance, if the player wanted to unlock the L96A1 Sniper rifle, they would first have to unlock the M95. The ranking system and unlockables can be used on all servers which allow them, but only "official" (ranked) servers record and send back stats.

The current section right now sounds much like a game guide and a step-by-step manual of how to obtain certain weapons. This section should only talk about the feature overall, how it affects the game and the players. I'll rewrite this section after I'm done rewriting the Special Forces section. --BirdKr 17:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I've attempted to rewrite that section. Can someone give me an indication of how effective my rewrite is? --Snipes (talk) 11:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Stat outage

Is this worth mentioning? No? Corpx 07:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I think it is totally worth mentioning, part of the "history" of the game.

Something tells me that would be a "No"...we don't even have a history section to begin with. --BirdKr 22:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The only place I can foresee this fitting in, is if we were to create a "Criticisms" section. I'm not implying we should necessarily create such a section, by the way. --Snipes (talk) 06:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Mutiny

About the mutiny, it is a server setting and a lot of servers have it disabled, so I dont think it should be mentioned as part of the game. Corpx 21:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

You'll need more than personal experience to claim "a lot of servers have it disabled". I can cancel that out with my own personal experience that most do have that option. Furthermore, that would be part of original research and for this claim, I doubt there are any reliable sources for verification. Finally, if it is not widely used, that doesn't mean it's not part of the game. As a compromise, I'll add in the fact that servers can disable this option. --BirdKr 16:32, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Expansion/Booster Pack Screenshots

I found that the X-pack section was lacking in screenshots. Would it be possible to include in-game screenshots of Special Forces, Armoured Fury or Euro Force featuring any of the new vehicles/armies/weapons? There were screenshots in the Battlefield 2142 article so I thought it would be nice to add some here as well.

--Hornet94 07:10, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

That can be done. 83.131.4.238 16:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I own the games, I'll try to take some shots.andrewrox424 ^Bleep 12:16, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll try and get some screens myself but how do you take them? I would be very grateful if someone could tell me how, Thanx

--Hornet94 20:20, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

While you're playing the game, hit "Print Screen", or "PrntScrn". It's a button on your keyboard that should be next to scroll lock. After you've done that, it'll be saved to My Documents/Battlefield 2/Screenshots; one will be low-quality, the other one fairly decent. I'd advise using the good quality .png image. Seegoon 21:46, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanx a million!I'll probably get some screens by the 17th November and post them here.

--Hornet94 13:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

How about this screenshot? It shows the AIL Desert Raider.

File:AIL desert raider.png

Screeshot showing the AIL Desert Raider, one of the new vehicles available in Battlefield 2: Special Forces

--Hornet94 08:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

squads/commanders/subordination

does any1 whos played it know if the ppl in the game follow your orders Exactly. im thinking of buying it but i wont if every1 just runs around 4 like a free for all.

If you play on Singleplayer mode the bots will respond to all of the team commands and the bots in your squad will only respond to some of squad commands. On Multiplayer mode the human team-mates will respond to all of the commands most of the time. I have BF2 and if your considering buying it, go ahed it is a very good game. I suggest you buy the Battlefield 2: Complete Collection pack so you will be able to enjoy the entire game with all its Expansion-packs.

--Hornet 94 12:29, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

• It really depends on the server. There are servers that enforce squad based gameplay and servers that dont care Corpx 15:57, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

ok thxs, im definetly buying it, but 4 varification, is there a server called TacticalGamer (enforces subordination) or any similar servers pls and thxs :)

It isn't a server I have come across recently but there are other good servers approved by EA. By the way I find 64 size maps the most interesting to play.

--Hornet 94 11:15, 12 August 2007 (UTC) Ask at a site like bf2tracker.com or bf2s.com and they'll be able to guide you better on finding servers Corpx 15:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The people that join squads usually listen to the squad leader, and it can be really cool when people use VOIP.

Euro Force Maps

I wanted to point out that Euro Force Maps do not have a 64-player size. Could you include that in the Expansion Packs section?

--Hornet94 11:29, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

O

Ranks?

should there be a ranks section, if there should, give me a heads up and ill write it in. andrewrox424 ^Bleep 11:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

A rank list adds nothing encyclopedic to the game. See WP:NOT, WP:TRIVIA and WP:VG/GL. --Scottie_theNerd 11:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Ranks

there is also the titles of Master Sergeant and Master Gunnery Sergeant, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Feeblezak (talk • contribs) 10:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

BF2: SF Screenshot

I tried to upload it again

--Hornet94 15:07, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Battlefield 3

Ok, info on this is limited, but it has been confirmed there will be a battlefield3 set around the same time as BF2, and it will feature 40 players per team and destructable environments. If anyone has anymore info perhaps they can create a new article for it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.14.12.35 (talk) 16:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I think your thinking of Battlfield Bad Company. I know that has destructable buildings and the like, and it's supposed to take place in the "near future". I doubt Dice or whoever makes this series would produce two sequels at the same time

EditIt appears I was wrong as they are making Battlefield Bad Company AND Battlefied Heroes at the same time. Still think that you're reffering to BF bad company though--CrazyOmega (talk) 22:09, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

New info: now Battlefield 3 has been confirmed by DICE, though no specific details on setting or gameplay are out yet (not even images). Link to story: http://www.gamespot.com/news/6211809.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;1 It's not going to be out until after this fiscal year, but we should put this info in anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by FstrthnU (talk • contribs) 04:01, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Specs?

Anyone seen the specifications for this game? It's not on the sidebar, like others, so I was wondering if it should be set up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.231.178.118 (talk) 16:39, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll try and get the specs

--Hornet94 (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

On the box it says XP 32 bit, 1.7ghz Pentium 4 or better, 512mb ram, 8x DVD drive or better, 128mb Video card (with pixel shader 1.4) - supports the Nvidia 5700+, 6200+, radeon 8500 or x300+

also needs 2.3gb (+ an extra 1.5 for special forces expansion and so i assume probably abit less again for each of the booster packs) + 3gb free space on the C drive.

In reality it runs much better on 1-2gb of ram (esp. on vista) and a 256mb video card (p.s the supported video cards are a joke. You can nearly max it out on an old ATI x800 or a Nvidia 8600. And you can totally max it out on a high end card like a 880 or an x1950.Even an old x600 or x1650 can run it on like medium/high

Doesnt run well (if at all) on intel integrated video. I dont think they have the pixel shader tech. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.16.153.191 (talk) 16:52, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Battlefield 2 Engine

I was reading through the article about the Refractor 2 Game Engine and there it states that the Refractor 2 engine is used for BF1942, BF: Vietnam, BF2 and BF2142. Would it be more correct to change the game engine to Refrator 2 instead of Battefield 2?

--Hornet94 (talk) 10:33, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

The article of Refractor 2 provides little information with no citations. It's better to use the words of developers than a stub uncited Wikipedia article. --BirdKr (talk) 07:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

Request to add a link

Could a link to the BF2 section of Planet Battlefield be added? http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/bf2/?game=3 This section provided a lot of useful information on every aspect of the game including the awards and ranks system which is not listed on this entry. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.154.231 (talk) 03:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

My issue here is that if we post one unofficial information site about this game, then more will follow. I remember once the External links being long with many leading to fan sites, forums, and repetitive/same information. As much to the inconvenience to new readers of Battlefield 2 (Google: Battlefield 2) I think it's better off to not add it in. Same goes to other unofficial sites. --BirdKr (talk) 22:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, not a search engine. Remy B (talk) 23:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

tactics section

Is there any support here for retaining the tactics section? I realize it was still in development, and in a semi-developed phase but I feel we might as well have something like that. ---Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 14:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Recommend to add a list of active communities.

Recommend to add a list of active communities.

The list start and expand from here.

ZB clan and their web version of BFHQ: http://www.zbclan.net/bf2/bfhq/leaderboards.aspx

Renfeng (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Banned in China...

Wasn't this game banned in China (PRC) just like C&C: Generals..? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.108.148.224 (talk) 00:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I never heard it was...it doesn't target china, only its army...and theres no campaign, so I don't think chinese government banned it. --Novis-M (talk) 02:38, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

battlefield 4 was banned in china. not battlefield 2--216.186.185.230 (talk) 18:24, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Version information is incorrect

Unless the BF2 website is mistaken the current version is 1.41, not 1.50 as this line suggests: "On March 21st, the 1.50 patch was released after many months of doubt following Dice's late 2008 announcement that a 1.50 patch was due shortly." I'd suggest removing that line as it refers to BF 2142, not BF2. Don't Panic (talk) 02:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

BF2 Modding and BF2 Editor

I realized that there is little information regarding BF2 modding, third party BF2 mods and the BF2 Editor ([1]). Has anyone thought about adding some information about these topics?

--Kahrn (talk) 12:18, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Rebel and Insurgent Flags

If the MEC flag was made on Wikimedia, why not the Rebels and Insugents? Maildiver (talk) 21:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Mods

What happened to the list of mods? Maildiver (talk) 21:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Why does Battlefield Play4Free redirect here?

They're two different games... why does it redirect here? YuriKaslov (talk) 15:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Servers and clans sections

I disagree with the inclusion of these sections. They are unsourced, mostly original research, and do not add very much knowledge that is specific to BF2 that does not apply to many/most other online multiplayer FPSs out there. I also feel the clans section may be used as something of a WP:COATRACK for advertising BF2 clans which are entirely not notable. OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 05:25, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

The clans section has since been removed, but I feel my comments still hold on the server section. OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 22:23, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

OK...as you see I cleaned it up a bit, but I need help with this. Sorry about the brisqueness earlier. I got rid of the possible WP:COATRACK on the clans by hyperlinking that to the correct section. Albiet private gaming-servers are not unique to BF2, the fact is THAT is how Battlefield 2 is structured...shouldn't it be at least mentioned? That as opposed to company sponsored servers ie. WOW and many console games). And for brevity's sake it could link to the wikipedia definition of "gaming server" but the "gaming server" page in wikipedia is too challenged. If nothing else, the structure of ranked and unranked is an extremely important dynamic of the game and HAS to be mentioned in some fashion...possibly in the gameplay section instead of it's own section. It's at least as important as the list of patches or mods. I dunno. I could be wrong. I'll defer to your opinion at the end. DanOfEarth (talk) 23:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

While the ranked/unranked dynamic might be notable within the BF2 community, my primary concern is, to an uninterested party reading this page, does this information add to their knowledge about the game? (short reply for now, sorry) OSborn^arf_{contributionatoration} 23:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

At first glance that could be the case, however weighing the importance of it against the level of detail the rest of the article delves into, it's extremely relevant. At the end of the day it's just another FPS. However in 2005 when the game came out, the players were obsessed with their rank/stats and would be FURIOUS if even one game went by without the stats being recorded, much less actually playing on an unranked server on purpose. "Why even play if no stats" was the usual response. And...the ability to "control" your own server....being able to riddle your server with special rules via the BF2cc console...really created an interesting loyalty or hatred toward certain servers; being able to kick and ban players off of your server for "life" if one sees fit. That was a big deal. All of this literally filled the forums with nothing but bitter arguements on server rules, server favorites, mismanagement, etc: No bunny-hopping, no jihading, wait in lines for jets, you must join a squad, no C4 on flags, no Tking for vehicles, No-redlining in a chopper, actual map rotation, on and on. It went WAY past the clan loyalty thing. What server you were on wildly changed the gameplay. Never have I seen that extreme dynamic on other games, such as COD, America's Army, Counter Strike, etc. That's why the game and community was/is somewhat unique as a FPS. Coupled with the squad-play and the in-game VOIP...the game was/is more communicative and closer to the "global-village" sort of structure than any other FPS. Even when 2142 and Battlefield Bad Company came out, the whole thing disappeared. Tis a shame actually. All of the players are waiting for that next "Battlefield Killer". Hmmm. DanOfEarth (talk) 15:07, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Soundtrack

Who composed the soundtrack? // Liftarn (talk)

WW3 Infobox issue

Russia fought the SAS in one map but the game said later they made peace... --66.220.232.35 (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

The dates of the individual confrontations are (with the exception of Wake Island) completely unmentioned, so it's quite possible that it was after their debacle that the EU/GB and Russia made peace. YuriKaslov (talk) 12:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

MEC flag

That's not the in-game flag of the Middle Eastern Coalition. YuriKaslov (talk) 12:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, you can still play online: https://battlelog.co/downloads.php#client — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.187.82.253 (talk) 05:07, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Game existence

So, BATTLEFIELD 2 is an on-line only game. That is all there is. The master server has been closed. I am aware there are third party servers as the article mentions for various mods (probably LAN capability like any game), however, inasmuch as the ability to find a game defines whether it can be played, does this game even exist anymore?

I mean, I've got the discs, but if I can't play the game, ...BATTLEFIELD 2 was a first person shooter...

Yeah you can: https://battlelog.co — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.172.149.230 (talk) 13:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

This might apply also to other on-line only games which were hosted commercially and abandoned by their publishers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.155.161.60 (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2014 (UTC)