Jump to content

Battlefield 3


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Great post kraxus and lots of valid points.   Any thread about a big game is going to contain alot of opinions that are either one way or the other.   My personal opinion on the game thus far is m

most games in alpha testing do not have Punkbuster turned on if it's even coded yet, in the alpha stage you are testing site & server load, distribution thru Orgin and more.   the alpha testers

Kinda depends on who you game with. I always find playing MP as a lonewolf is like sex, you can do it alone but its much more fun with someone else :P

Posted Images

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/

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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"

Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of pre-order info, EA store now lists the PC price at $59.95

 

2rnijqv.png

 

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 by kraxus187
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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$. ;)

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.