I think it's fair to compare the two, since they're both objective-based, team-oriented, first-person-shooters with vehicles. I'm kind of a starwars nut so I want to get Battlefront but Battlefield seems to have better graphics/better multiplayer. Anyway, massassi?

If you want Star Wars go Battlefront. If you want more realistic go Battlefield.

That's a rather obvious statement.

Haven't tried Battlefront, but Battlefield 2 needs a beast of a machine to run smoothly. Tried the demo?

I don't think it's that bad. It runs way better than doom3 or even HL2 for me.

I can run it at 1600x1200 (no AA, all settings on medium except draw distance which is 100%) on my machine: AMD 2800+ Barton, 1gb PC3200 ddr, Radeon 9800 pro 128mb. Runs about 40fps in most areas. Oh and i haven't played battlefront 2 so i can't compare them.

[QUOTE=Daeron the Nerfherder]Haven't tried Battlefront, but Battlefield 2 needs a beast of a machine to run smoothly. Tried the demo?[/QUOTE]

A beast? I run it fine on a freaking Dell.

I'd say that Battlefield 2 is a better game all round. But Battlefront is a bit more arcadey, so it depends on what kind of game you like.

Special forces however is a bargain and makes the city maps just plain amazing.

Uhm. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish by this post, given that Dell has a perfectly capable line of gaming computers. They even sell SLI'ed 7800 GTXes in them.

Yes, but I'm the cheapest model they sell that doesn't have integrated graphics.

So? Given that you can get a low-end Dell with a 3.2 GHz Pentium D in it and you can replace the video card yourself. I mean, Dell's desktop machines don't have the greatest build quality in the world, but having a dab of solder to keep your video card from falling out during shipping is hardly the end of the world.

I thought so too but evidently not.

Why one or the other? Get both! :p

Actually they don't. They take perfectly good hardware (besides the P4s) and cripple it.

Baconfish, you can run almost any game on weak video cards if you turn the settings all the way down. If someone calls a game demanding they mean that it's demanding at high settings.

http://www1.us.dell.com/content/products/productdetails.aspx/xpsdt_600?c=us&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs

Actually they do. Also, they don't take perfectly good hardware and cripple it. I know some friends with Dells and they do more than fine--they do perfectly. Hell, some friends have Dells that outperformed my PC when I had the newest technology on the market. Dells aren't bad. Stop being a [h] fanboy.

Did you read the article? Also, you're link is broken.

Fixed, and yes, I read all the [h] articles.

Battlefront 2 might actually be the more realistic of the two.

So you retort is page that lists some of the hardware that Dells have in them? I really don't follow your logic.


The whole point of the article was that the Dell was poor, not because of the hardware in it, but because of the lousy software shipped with it. No OS disk, and tones of bloat-ware that bogged down the system and made it perform far worse than it should. Any idiot could slap a GTX in a PC. Any idiot could put an FX57 in a MoBo. Dell is one of the largest companies in the US. It could easily made amazing gaming PCs, but it doesn’t because of all the 3rd party contracts it has to put crappy bloat-ware on them. Which, of course, doesn't matter to the average XPS buyer, because they probably don't even look at their game's graphics settings, let alone change them.

Dell doesn’t make computers. It takes computer parts, performs the service of assembling them into a computer. Dell is not the hard-ware in the computers, Dell is the software configuration, the tech support, the act of putting everything together and loading soft-ware onto third party parts. They are the people who chose to only offer Intel CPUs for gaming PCs, they are the people who allow companies to pay them to put bloat ware on your PC that makes it perform slower than it should. Dell is the company who buys cheap generic CD drives and sells back to you at twice the price of good ones. Everything that Dell does, sucks. Dell is not Nvidia, Dell does not make video cards. Reselling a good video card with your PC does not make you a good PC assembler.

Uh, you said they don't have 2 7800GTX's in SLi. [H] went with the budget option, they do have 2 7800GTX's in SLi. It's not very ****ing hard to follow.



It does make amazing gaming PCs--they just come with crap software loaded on. If you can't figure out how to get said software off to play your games, you don't deserve to be gaming in the first place.

Dell doesn't make computers, but have you even SEEN any BTX cases around? No. They also had PCI-E before PCI-E hit the retail motherboard market. Point is--they don't make computers, but they make the parts accessible easily, popular, and set the trend. And Dell does make your Monitor, mouse, keyboard, and maybe your speakers. They also make the warranty that can't really be provided in any form or fashion from anyone else, and tech support that isn't really all that bad (though it isn't great either). They don't suck, you're just bigoted.

You lose.

Dell uses Intel processors because Intel strongarmed them into an exclusive deal. If they sold even one Dimension XPS with an Athlon 64 it would cost their company tens of millions. Don't blame Dell for that.

Dude (Haw)

It takes 10 minutes, if that, to wipe off Dell's bloatware.

Another 20 minutes to disable all the useless windowsXP processes, that nearly every fresh install runs.

And then if I felt like it, the 10 seconds it takes to change the desktop picture.



I bought a Dell because of the discounts I get through UPS, I'm too lazy to build one, and I have no idea what I want to buy.

I got a gret system for about half the price of the default price, and 100% less hassle.

Yeah. It's not that big a deal to clean everything up.

What are you smoking? Where on earth did I say that?




In order to get the PC to perform as it should it's actually more work than just building it your-self. They don't make most of their components. Even the keyboards are probably contracted out to 3rd party people. That's not the point. What Dell does is put the parts together, install the OS, and ship it to your door so you don't have to think about it. Because it usually charges way more than the components are worth and because they do a poor job of assembling the PC (bloat ware), Dell makes a poor choice for a gaming PC. That’s not to say all OEMs stink, there are plenty of OEMs that do a good job of building gaming PCs. Dell just happens to care more about getting a little side money out of their 3rd party bloat ware contracts than it does about your gaming experience.

Besides their gaming line is Intel exclusive. How stupid is that?

On the other hand, Dell becomes a good prospect if you wait for the right coupons, especially with their laptop line. But, on a normal day, the work of building a PC is off-set by the trouble it is to get them to give you the OS disk, the trouble it takes to get rid of everything (I prefer a reformat), and the cost difference between the parts. They are just not geared toward gamers. Just because you can undo the hassle they cause you doesn’t mean they are a good company.

This is the stupidest remark you've made yet on this thread (saying something). Intel processors are VERY capable gaming chips--if you can cool them right. And BTX has a much higher efficiency rate in cooling than any other formfactor. Overclocked, P4E's can destroy AMDs, whether you want to admit it or not. Go look it up.

You read your own goddamn posts, I'm not going to point it out to you when it's glaringly obvious where you said they don't put 7800GTX's in SLi. I'm not smoking anything (at the moment).

To everything else--stop being a fanboy.

OK, first off, Dell makes decent PCs, but who is going to argue that they make BETTER PCs then what you get if you go custom. No one? Good, thank you. Now, we've determined that Dell makes good PCs if you don't mind taking all the crap they come pre-installed with off. ALL STORE BOUGHT PCS ARE LIKE THAT.

Now stop derailing this guy's thread, he wanted to know about Battlefront and Battlefield.

Also,



That's the part he meant for the "Actually they don't." thing, not that they include 7800GTX SLI. If you weren't trying to come up with links and argue about dells and paid attention to what you were reading, you would have gathered that. (and I mean this for both of you.)

I like Battlefront >.>
BACK ON THREAD TOPIC

Maybe if Obi had bolded that instead of making me think it was the 7800GTX part, since you know, that's the last thing Jon said.

I played the demo for Battlefield 2, and Battlefront 1 came with my new PS2... so I can't say too much, but I really liked Battlefield better...

I think that Battlefield 2 offers a superior MP experience, while Battlefront 2 offers a great SP experience.

I have tons of fun playing just the demo for Battlefield 2; although, I've heard that the demo level is the worst one. I just played Battlefront 2 yesterday, and it was fun also. What I would do? Buy Battlefield 2 and pirat- um... rent Battlefront 2.

What was the map in the demo?

I can't remember the name, but it has a US carrier, a beach, construction site, etc.

Almost every Battlefield 2 level has that in it, HAH.


Anyways.

Battlefield 2 is a much better, much more polished game.

I haven't played in months though, once I get broadband back it's on. I love the idiots that run out into the same spot every time.

PEG.

Battlefield 2.
Juicy.

Gulf of Oman.

I don't think LucasArts bother to polish and fine-tune most of their games. Often, fanboys don't care.

What?

Gulf Of Oman isn't the worst map, it's one of the best. Get your opinions straight.

There really isn't a bad map in BF2.

True, but Kubra is no great shakes.

I demand a poll!