HSMagnet Posted February 8, 2011 Share Posted February 8, 2011 hahaha they learned their lesson all right lots of DLC=lots o cash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 9, 2011 Author Share Posted February 9, 2011 Q: When I think about Battlefield 2, I always come back to the Commander position and the game within the game that arose from having Special Forces objectives. Are those returning in the proper sequel? A: We could implement it, but the questions is "how do you get the threshold lower?" That's not by making it more complicated. Our challenge is to make sure that anyone that just jumps into the game will get it. One of the biggest problems with Commander was that only two people could use it. Some people like it but most people didn't care. They just cared that someone gave them an order or that their squad could play together having fun on their own more or less. Then the most hardcore people went into the Commander mode and learned how to use that. You could argue it was a great feature, but looking at the number you could also say that no one uses it. We tried in Bad Company 2 to give that t players, so you could issue orders to your squad, and you could use gadgets like the UAV that only the commander could use earlier — giving the power back to the players so everyone could use it. That made a big difference. More people could enjoy the game. We lowered the threshold for everyone because we gave it to everyone. We now know the boundaries are for keeping the strategic depth and complexity while lowering the threshold to get in. http://bf3blog.com/2011/02/battlefield-3-wont-include-commander-feature/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surfy Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 9, 2011 Author Share Posted February 9, 2011 I'm starting to wonder if Frostbite 2 is heading towards being another Crysis in that you needed a hig end machine to even play it. BC2 @ 32 players can be quite demanding and I've read a lot that 24 players seems to run better. MoH ran even better with no destruction and 24 players max. With BF3 it's 64 players, more advanced destruction, bigger maps (I assume) and sharper graphics. Add to that DX10 or better is required. Nice to have cool things but they won't do much if it's lagging all over the place. Guess we will have to wait and see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMagnet Posted February 9, 2011 Share Posted February 9, 2011 seems even the diehard BF fans are not totally fooled i hope it IS great, but, i have my anti-smoke panties on Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xX_Renegade_Xx Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 "To be honest, Bad Company 2 was a bigger success than we anticipated," he admitted. "We did not account for that. We sold a lot of copies and don't feel bad about where we were, but looking back, we should have released more, bigger content after." I'm quite surprised that they didn't think this game would sell well considering the amount of money they must have piled into marketing. Taken from the game description when it was released: All of these features combine to deliver spectacular and unpredictable action moments found nowhere else in the genre. Battlefield Bad Company 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gutshot Posted February 10, 2011 Share Posted February 10, 2011 As tempting as BF3 is right now, due to the masterful PR campaign and trickled out, carefully planned hype building, I can't help but find myself yawning. As HSMagnet said, very nicely I might add, "zomglookatalltheschtuffwearedoing", it's getting a bit dry. In the end, BF3 may be a bit of fun to play, but, I'll be willing to bet it will be business as usual in the end. Game hype has gotten to be so redundant it's actually boring and degrading. Here's an idea Dice. Hire John Gibson to promote your game. Let the man tell about the features in clear, concise terms. Let him speak openly about the game and give ass-kicking demos of it. If a feature isn't going to be available, then Mr. Gibson will just say "no, that won't be in there". Much better than the current community manager method of saying "ghskfefklzdmvdlvsdllkzffkkl" What did he just say? Idk, it's cloaked in PR speak, please spend the next few weeks trying to decipher it in forums and webcasts, be sure to add plenty of opinion and speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMagnet Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 and even after release they still can't give a straight answer....."well we might, almost, maybe, someday think about kinda appending some type of almost that" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gutshot Posted February 11, 2011 Share Posted February 11, 2011 and even after release they still can't give a straight answer....."well we might, almost, maybe, someday think about kinda appending some type of almost that" You got that right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 12, 2011 Author Share Posted February 12, 2011 The Beta of #BF3 will be expected in October. http://twitter.com/#!/SupportEA/status/36515570073473024 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buttscratcher Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Assuming EA will not let the 2011 holiday sales window pass without having this game packaged and ready by Black Friday, thats at best a month worth of "beta testing". If so, sounds just like the Bc2 "beta", and three to four months (minium) of server fees - for a buggy ass game that was not properly tested prior to launch. Why on earth wont they actually do legitimate testing, that provides themself a realistic timetable to effect meaningful changes? Butt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMagnet Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 Assuming EA will not let the 2011 holiday sales window pass without having this game packaged and ready by Black Friday, thats at best a month worth of "beta testing". If so, sounds just like the Bc2 "beta", and three to four months (minium) of server fees - for a buggy ass game that was not properly tested prior to launch. Why on earth wont they actually do legitimate testing, that provides themself a realistic timetable to effect meaningful changes? Butt because they make as much money dumping the half finished crap and then they get to half finish another in a year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaythegreat1 Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 I'm starting to wonder if Frostbite 2 is heading towards being another Crysis in that you needed a hig end machine to even play it. BC2 @ 32 players can be quite demanding and I've read a lot that 24 players seems to run better. MoH ran even better with no destruction and 24 players max. With BF3 it's 64 players, more advanced destruction, bigger maps (I assume) and sharper graphics. Add to that DX10 or better is required. Nice to have cool things but they won't do much if it's lagging all over the place. Guess we will have to wait and see. I've noticed maps (like Oasis) Start to really lag when all the buildings are destroyed. Compared to maps say.. Heavy Metal where only a couple buildings collapse doesn't seem to lag. Also, Vietnam runs a lot smoother than Vanilla BC2.. just that my clan doesn't seem to enjoy the game. I share that same fear Maydax.. hopefully they don't pile too much into the "eye-candy" side of things that take-away from performance of the game. What good does it do to have a game look awesome, if it plays like crap? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMagnet Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 tbh they don't even look that good and the resource hogness just points to poor coding imo. the damn games don't look much different no matter what kind of rig you have. when a couple of default cvars being brought over from the console port unchanged makes a lot of difference in CPU/GPU utilization, then it is just asinine. there is no testing being done or any one eyed, lobotomized crack head would have grunted and slapped the monitor if that was their elite QA tester Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share Posted February 23, 2011 See the first glimpse of actual in-game footage from Battlefield 3 as a U.S. Marine squad engages hostile forces in Iraqi Kurdistan. Battlefield 3 Limited Edition features the digital expansion pack Battlefield 3: Back to Karkand at no extra charge. This themed multiplayer expansion pack includes four legendary maps from Battlefield 2 boldly re-imagined with Frostbite 2 physics, destruction and visuals. Completing the package are classic Battlefield 2 weapons and vehicles, unique rewards, new achievements/trophies, and more. Players anxious to start the fight can pre-order the Battlefield 3 Limited Edition now at EA Store at this link: http://bit.ly/hf49Oy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xX_Renegade_Xx Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 That is a great looking teaser but I'd like to see some MP gameplay, I'll reserve my judgement at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share Posted February 23, 2011 Speaking of pre-order info, EA store now lists the PC price at $59.95 http://www.ebgames.com/pc/games/battlefield-3-limited-edition/90173 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraxus187 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Speaking of pre-order info, EA store now lists the PC price at $59.95 http://www.ebgames.com/pc/games/battlefield-3-limited-edition/90173 I was tempted to go ahead and pay for it in advance....despite all the probablt ehadaches we have from constant fixes (Re " Bad Company 2) at initial releasew after Beta. But then I remembered back a few days and thought of all the people who did the same for Battlefield 1943 (PC edition)...and had to wait for a year after the intended release date to find out they weren't going to get it after all. EA blew all thier chances this past year...I can see BF3 being the last straw game with them as far as PC gaming is conerned. Edited February 23, 2011 by kraxus187 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 24, 2011 Author Share Posted February 24, 2011 I think it's just sad games have to resort to gimmicks such as day 1 unlocks or exclusive map packs that you have to pay for if you don't pre-order. Then those people often get suck with a buggy turd with no hope of getting their money back. Now you get punished for being a smart consumer by waiting after release day to see what the game is really like. Digital distribution methods needs a return policy option imo, even 3-7 days so that consumers don't get ripped off. Bet devs and publishers wouldn't be so fast to push a buggy game threw the door if people had the option to get their money back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
=GoMg=THE__DRIFTER Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Another 60 dollar game with rinse and repeat yearly releases... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellreturn Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I have seen BC2 in 20$ couple of times. New game = 60$ = Tons of issue and patches to come. After 6 months, game becomes little stable and price drops to 20$. Simple maths tells me, I should buy stable game in 20$ and not beta versions in 60$. ;) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaydaX Posted February 24, 2011 Author Share Posted February 24, 2011 While the BF3 in-game teaser graphics look great, I wonder at what cost. Will you need a computer from NASA to run it at those settings. I have a gut feeling it may turn into another crysis for steep system requirements. I think if anything hurts this game it will be the higher system requirements. Wonder if any Windows XP owners pre-ordered thinking they can run it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaythegreat1 Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 The 4 maps for the expansion pack have been revealed. http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3/1392330-what-maps-back-karkand-discussion-2.html Wake Island, Strike at Karkand, Gulf of Oman and Sharqi Peninsula. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piggy Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I'm preordering, pardon my language, I don't give a shit about the details I was a hardcore BF2 player. Got called hacker a lot, used teamwork to the extreme, so I'm all for an updated version of BF2. And for those of you complaining about how "buggy" games are, no game is perfect upon release, NONE. BC2 took many patches but now works fine. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMagnet Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 I'm preordering, pardon my language, I don't give a shit about the details I was a hardcore BF2 player. Got called hacker a lot, used teamwork to the extreme, so I'm all for an updated version of BF2. And for those of you complaining about how "buggy" games are, no game is perfect upon release, NONE. BC2 took many patches but now works fine. your prerogative. hope it works out for you don't care if bc2 "works fine" btw. if that is fine i will pass. it sucks. period i would rather play peggle with my back to the monitor.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.