System requirements? Pfff...

Shabbaman · 26-11-2005, 23:50

I notice a lot of you have problems running civ4. Well, because I upgraded my machine for battlefield2 civ4 runs really, really smooth. Compared to what I had to put up with before I got bf2 to work, civ4 runs smooth on all your machines. Nevertheless I met all system requirements, but bf2 is really picky (read: lazy programming). Game programmers claim that it's too difficult to keep in mind all possible combinations of hardware, but that's bull imo.
After some patches the game worked fine.

However, due to lazy programming, more bugs are showing up. Thus, more patches are showing up. And then, even more lazy programming is roaring it's ugly head. The system requirement for bf is 2.3 GB hard disk space (plus something for savegames (what savegames?) and directX). No problem, I have more than enough space on my D-partition. Installed the game is only 2.03 GB.
But.
Upon installment of the umpteenth patch I got a "not enough disk space" error. WTF? So apparently the patch needs 1.6 GB disk space. The butt-lazy programmers thought it was a good idea to deny me to opportunity to let the patch place temporary files on a disk of my choice. No, the files need to be placed on the C-partition, where no other bf2 files are located. And, coincidentally, hasn't got 1.6 GB free space left. Because it is my windows partition. I doubt I am the only bf2 player that has the windows partition sized to fit windows on it, and not much else. I've got 1.4 GB spare space, and I think that's pretty generous (note that 1.4 is pretty close to the required 1.6, grrr). Obviously I could resize the partition with partition magic, but that's not without risk. Eventually I figure out that I can move the page file to the other partition, so now I got a total of 2 GB free space. Hurray. Patch installed, finally. Because all official servers upgrade to the latest version you are (close to) denied to play online. This makes patching a requirement, since the single player version is practically non-existent. Due to lazy ass programming.
I must say that the game runs even better now. After a half year I could say the game is finally out of betatesting.

Obviously that means that it is now time to release an expansion pack filled with bugs and almost no new content, just to rip off your customers. We present you, Battlefield2: Play the world! Wow. Now, I'm not dumb enough to buy it, since it doesn't add a whole lot new content and all reviews say it's filled with bugs.
But EA games has a surprise for me. To make the core game compatible with the expansion set, I need to install a patch. As a bonus I might get a bonus weapon if I'd spend a whole month full time playing the game, hurray. So I download the 288 MB of patch crap, and run it. And guess what? Despite the patch not fixing real issues or at least adding a map like the previous patch, it requires a whopping 3 GB of free hard disk space!

3 GB I don't have.

Well, I have them, on another partition. But lazy ass programming prohibits me of running the patch on that drive. Lazy ass programmers that knew that a lot of people were having problems installing the patch due to a small windows partition, decided to make the same lazy ass error again. And then again, 3 GB? WTF? That's more than the whole game!!!

So much for system requirements. Someone should sue EA games for misleading information. I have the 2.3 GB that is required, I even have 2 GB more. But because I can't install this patch I can't play the game online anymore. Now, I could run partition magic (or better, let someone who knows what they're doing run partition magic for me and then send the bill to EA), but I won't. The next patch might require 5 GB, and then 10 GB... I know EA games has a really bad reputation, but to me it looks as if they've published misleading information about the system requirements.

ProPain · 27-11-2005, 00:31

And I thought Firaxis was bad .....

Said it before and will say it again: Play Blizzard games, these guys respect their customers and don't let you put up with this sort of crap.

DavidC · 27-11-2005, 12:59

Blizzard games ? The ones who totally fucked up Diablo ?

ProPain · 27-11-2005, 15:54

Diablo I or II?

Diablo I was ruined online by blatant cheating. I think that was the last time they allowed character storage on the clinet side

. Single player: great game!

Diablo II: The online cheating wasnt as bad as Diablo I. I played some online but mostly SP and again, I liked it a lot.

I wasnt a real fan of WCIII, but a lot of people loved it. Then again, I suck at WCII so that might play a role as well

26-11-2005, 23:50	#1
Shabbaman Administrator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Costa La Haya Posts: 8,493	System requirements? Pfff... I notice a lot of you have problems running civ4. Well, because I upgraded my machine for battlefield2 civ4 runs really, really smooth. Compared to what I had to put up with before I got bf2 to work, civ4 runs smooth on all your machines. Nevertheless I met all system requirements, but bf2 is really picky (read: lazy programming). Game programmers claim that it's too difficult to keep in mind all possible combinations of hardware, but that's bull imo. After some patches the game worked fine. However, due to lazy programming, more bugs are showing up. Thus, more patches are showing up. And then, even more lazy programming is roaring it's ugly head. The system requirement for bf is 2.3 GB hard disk space (plus something for savegames (what savegames?) and directX). No problem, I have more than enough space on my D-partition. Installed the game is only 2.03 GB. But. Upon installment of the umpteenth patch I got a "not enough disk space" error. WTF? So apparently the patch needs 1.6 GB disk space. The butt-lazy programmers thought it was a good idea to deny me to opportunity to let the patch place temporary files on a disk of my choice. No, the files need to be placed on the C-partition, where no other bf2 files are located. And, coincidentally, hasn't got 1.6 GB free space left. Because it is my windows partition. I doubt I am the only bf2 player that has the windows partition sized to fit windows on it, and not much else. I've got 1.4 GB spare space, and I think that's pretty generous (note that 1.4 is pretty close to the required 1.6, grrr). Obviously I could resize the partition with partition magic, but that's not without risk. Eventually I figure out that I can move the page file to the other partition, so now I got a total of 2 GB free space. Hurray. Patch installed, finally. Because all official servers upgrade to the latest version you are (close to) denied to play online. This makes patching a requirement, since the single player version is practically non-existent. Due to lazy ass programming. I must say that the game runs even better now. After a half year I could say the game is finally out of betatesting. Obviously that means that it is now time to release an expansion pack filled with bugs and almost no new content, just to rip off your customers. We present you, Battlefield2: Play the world! Wow. Now, I'm not dumb enough to buy it, since it doesn't add a whole lot new content and all reviews say it's filled with bugs. But EA games has a surprise for me. To make the core game compatible with the expansion set, I need to install a patch. As a bonus I might get a bonus weapon if I'd spend a whole month full time playing the game, hurray. So I download the 288 MB of patch crap, and run it. And guess what? Despite the patch not fixing real issues or at least adding a map like the previous patch, it requires a whopping 3 GB of free hard disk space! 3 GB I don't have. Well, I have them, on another partition. But lazy ass programming prohibits me of running the patch on that drive. Lazy ass programmers that knew that a lot of people were having problems installing the patch due to a small windows partition, decided to make the same lazy ass error again. And then again, 3 GB? WTF? That's more than the whole game!!! So much for system requirements. Someone should sue EA games for misleading information. I have the 2.3 GB that is required, I even have 2 GB more. But because I can't install this patch I can't play the game online anymore. Now, I could run partition magic (or better, let someone who knows what they're doing run partition magic for me and then send the bill to EA), but I won't. The next patch might require 5 GB, and then 10 GB... I know EA games has a really bad reputation, but to me it looks as if they've published misleading information about the system requirements. __________________ "Our spam is backed with COMETS!"

27-11-2005, 00:31	#2
ProPain Customized Admin :) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: sailing the seas of cheese. Posts: 5,852	And I thought Firaxis was bad ..... Said it before and will say it again: Play Blizzard games, these guys respect their customers and don't let you put up with this sort of crap. __________________ I fed my Dog the American Dream Well, he rolled over and he started to scream He said, I dig the taste of salt but it don't keep me alive yeah, yeah

27-11-2005, 15:54	#4
ProPain Customized Admin :) Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: sailing the seas of cheese. Posts: 5,852	Diablo I or II? Diablo I was ruined online by blatant cheating. I think that was the last time they allowed character storage on the clinet side . Single player: great game! Diablo II: The online cheating wasnt as bad as Diablo I. I played some online but mostly SP and again, I liked it a lot. I wasnt a real fan of WCIII, but a lot of people loved it. Then again, I suck at WCII so that might play a role as well __________________ I fed my Dog the American Dream Well, he rolled over and he started to scream He said, I dig the taste of salt but it don't keep me alive yeah, yeah

27-11-2005, 12:59	#3
DavidC Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: . Posts: 118	Blizzard games ? The ones who totally fucked up Diablo ?