Be a Supporter!

A Thread for Battlefield 3

  • 76,405 Views
  • 2,061 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic
Makeshift
Makeshift
  • Member since: Jul. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 32
Audiophile
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 03:24 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 03:14 PM, Grubby wrote: The console version is watered down too much for me to bear.

But you know, graphics and aesthetics don't matter in games.

I won't be getting it on PC because mine is shit. I really don't think the console version is going to be too much worse. Bad Company 2 is fine right now.

Makeshift
Makeshift
  • Member since: Jul. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 32
Audiophile
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 03:29 PM Reply

Oh oh oh and I don't see the big difference between 30 and 60 FPS. Crysis 2 ran on consoles at 30FPS and it was still great.

Here's a comparison of 15FPS - 30FPS - 60FPS.

Of course if I had the PC power to run it, I would choose the PC version.
IncendiaryProduction
IncendiaryProduction
  • Member since: Jan. 25, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 04:03 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 03:14 PM, Grubby wrote: Also I spent $700 on my PC that I made for myself, and it's four years old and it can still run the newest games on super high. So the argument that PC gaming is too expensive is invalid. \

$700?? Just buying the game is putting me in the hole. I'm borrowing the money.


A merry heart does good like a medicine; but a broken spirit dries the bones. Proverbs 17:22
"It's not gay because we're bros." - Gobblemeister

BBS Signature
killer32
killer32
  • Member since: Mar. 3, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 13
Artist
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 04:12 PM Reply

am i the only one who thinks this game is going to be a huge step down from bad company 2?
remember 2009 when i said mw2 is going to suck and everyone said i was a troll, just sayin'.
bf3 is going to suck.


"It makes me feel powerful when I say something so dumb that it halts discussion." - Jester

Yankee27
Yankee27
  • Member since: Nov. 5, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 16
Blank Slate
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 04:20 PM Reply

Battlefield 1 was okay
Battlefield 2, to me, sucked
Battlefield 3 needs to be at least half good or any good
( or I'm gonna shoot maself )

IncendiaryProduction
IncendiaryProduction
  • Member since: Jan. 25, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 04:28 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 04:12 PM, killer32 wrote: am i the only one who thinks this game is going to be a huge step down from bad company 2?

Back up this claim. Since DICE said that BC2 was just a game to test their new ideas for BF3.


A merry heart does good like a medicine; but a broken spirit dries the bones. Proverbs 17:22
"It's not gay because we're bros." - Gobblemeister

BBS Signature
IncendiaryProduction
IncendiaryProduction
  • Member since: Jan. 25, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 04:30 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 04:20 PM, Yankee27 wrote: Battlefield 1 was okay

There was no Battlefield 1.


A merry heart does good like a medicine; but a broken spirit dries the bones. Proverbs 17:22
"It's not gay because we're bros." - Gobblemeister

BBS Signature
naronic
naronic
  • Member since: Sep. 1, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 05:29 PM Reply

All I can say for this game is meh...
In terms of quality it definitely sends mw3 packing but honestly- its completely generic fps vs slightly less generic fps. The single player looked way to scripted for my tastes.

The entire concept of "grit and realism" has grown more stale to me than even the most watered down knock knock joke. Upon bf3's release we can at least reach a forte of what can be done in this sub-genre and game designers can get out of their emo/darkmetal phase and build games with some depth and creativity again.


BBS Signature
Snuff
Snuff
  • Member since: Oct. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 24
Melancholy
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 07:59 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 03:29 PM, Makeshift wrote:
Of course if I had the PC power to run it, I would choose the PC version.

I second this, though I probably do have the power to, the graphics might not reach the full potential and could cause it to lag. I haven't tested many new games on it yet, I believe the biggest challenge it's had so far is either Fallout 3, Oblivion or CoD 4, all of which ran fine. It might work, but I'd prefer the 360 version so I could play with friends.

Snuff
Snuff
  • Member since: Oct. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 24
Melancholy
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 08:02 PM Reply

Just realised I contradicted myself quite a bit there.

oops.

RazorHawk
RazorHawk
  • Member since: Mar. 19, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 34
Blank Slate
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 19th, 2011 @ 10:36 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 05:29 PM, naronic wrote: All I can say for this game is meh...
In terms of quality it definitely sends mw3 packing but honestly- its completely generic fps vs slightly less generic fps. The single player looked way to scripted for my tastes.

The entire concept of "grit and realism" has grown more stale to me than even the most watered down knock knock joke. Upon bf3's release we can at least reach a forte of what can be done in this sub-genre and game designers can get out of their emo/darkmetal phase and build games with some depth and creativity again.

Fair enough, but if you were in charge of designing the game, exactly how differently would you do it to satisfy as many people as possible who want a game that involves modern-day warfare and military-based combat that's as close to realistic as possible? What would you do differently that the game wasn't doing now? The objective is to make the game seem real, and make it feel like you're a real soldier, taking on real missions in realistic settings which yes, calls for "grit and realism." If you're complaining about Battlefield 3 doing this, hate to say it, but you're expecting the wrong things from the wrong game. Dice is using as much depth and creativity as they can without making the game seem fictitious and unbelievable. From what I've seen so far, they're doing a great job, but I can't confirm anything until I've seen and played the game myself.

If you're looking for that free-roaming FPS game where you don't follow mission objectives, you're more off on your own, and you're free to do whatever you like within the game's environment while breaking the rules of realism and so on, that's great, but Battlefield 3 is not going to be that kind of game (most military-based FPS games aren't). The game wants you to feel like a real soldier, and as a real soldier, you're told to follow orders, work with your squadmates and help each other survive, and accomplish mission objectives, something that Battlefield 3 is going to be mainly focusing on in it's single player.

Just sounds to me like you're expecting Battlefield 3 to suddenly break out of context and do something that's unrealistic that would ultimately deviate from the scope and setting of the game.


Don't pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men.

BBS Signature
naronic
naronic
  • Member since: Sep. 1, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 20th, 2011 @ 01:16 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 10:36 PM, RazorHawk wrote:
Just sounds to me like you're expecting Battlefield 3 to suddenly break out of context and do something that's unrealistic that would ultimately deviate from the scope and setting of the game.

what I'm saying is were reaching the forte of potential for realism.
There's not much you can do after you've included destructible environments outside of simply updating the gameplay every release.
What I'm hoping is that game designers realize this and these kind of fps games go out of style soon so that we can advance in the creativity department.

BF3 is going to possibly be a great game if it follows up with its established formula but its the ceiling for this sub-genre


BBS Signature
LiquidOoze
LiquidOoze
  • Member since: May. 13, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 26
Musician
Viri
Viri
  • Member since: Mar. 4, 2007
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 15
Blank Slate
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 20th, 2011 @ 03:04 PM Reply

At 6/20/11 02:43 PM, LiquidOoze wrote: Guess what, Battlefield 3 will have a framerate of 30 fps, which is ahlf of that of MW3. They couldn't let the game run on 60 fps because it would be too heavy.

This was brought up about ten posts ago. Regardless it doesn't really pertain to me, since im getting the PC version, but it really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.


[Last.FM] [Steam ID]
Bros 4 lyfe (he dun did dis sig)

BBS Signature
Makeshift
Makeshift
  • Member since: Jul. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 32
Audiophile
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 20th, 2011 @ 03:33 PM Reply

At 6/20/11 02:43 PM, LiquidOoze wrote: Guess what, Battlefield 3 will have a framerate of 30 fps, which is ahlf of that of MW3. They couldn't let the game run on 60 fps because it would be too heavy.

I didn't know what frames per second were when I played games before I was 13. Before then I didn't give a shit what the fps was... I still don't care as long as it isn't too atrocious.

... Movies run at 24fps.

Snuff
Snuff
  • Member since: Oct. 17, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 24
Melancholy
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 20th, 2011 @ 07:07 PM Reply

At 6/20/11 02:43 PM, LiquidOoze wrote: Guess what, Battlefield 3 will have a framerate of 30 fps, which is ahlf of that of MW3. They couldn't let the game run on 60 fps because it would be too heavy.

Doesn't bother me too much, it's not like it'll be unplayable.

IncendiaryProduction
IncendiaryProduction
  • Member since: Jan. 25, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 20th, 2011 @ 10:24 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 10:36 PM, RazorHawk wrote: things

This makes me think of something I would like to see in the near future for FPSs. Hand signals.

When performing movements at Young Marines, we use hand signals, we don't talk. That is pretty much how it goes in combat, not much talking.

I would like to see very team-based gameplay that uses motion detection stuff to let me be able to silently tell my squad to move from a column to a skirmishers, stuff like that.

I imagine it wouldn't be very popular with the general public though. But I can dream.


A merry heart does good like a medicine; but a broken spirit dries the bones. Proverbs 17:22
"It's not gay because we're bros." - Gobblemeister

BBS Signature
Danavers
Danavers
  • Member since: Jun. 7, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 23
Blank Slate
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 21st, 2011 @ 04:10 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 04:30 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote:
At 6/19/11 04:20 PM, Yankee27 wrote: Battlefield 1 was okay
There was no Battlefield 1.

Battlefield 1942, Vietnam was like the Fallout: New Vegas to BF1942.


BBS Signature
IncendiaryProduction
IncendiaryProduction
  • Member since: Jan. 25, 2010
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 11
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 21st, 2011 @ 07:23 PM Reply

At 6/21/11 04:10 PM, Danavers wrote:
At 6/19/11 04:30 PM, IncendiaryProduction wrote:
At 6/19/11 04:20 PM, Yankee27 wrote: Battlefield 1 was okay
There was no Battlefield 1.
Battlefield 1942, Vietnam was like the Fallout: New Vegas to BF1942.

I know it was the first one, but what I was saying is that there is no BF1. I thought the poster was confusing the bad company franchise with simply the battlefield franchise, which are completely different.


A merry heart does good like a medicine; but a broken spirit dries the bones. Proverbs 17:22
"It's not gay because we're bros." - Gobblemeister

BBS Signature
Graduation
Graduation
  • Member since: Sep. 28, 2004
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 33
Blank Slate
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 22nd, 2011 @ 03:40 AM Reply

At 6/20/11 01:16 PM, naronic wrote: what I'm saying is were reaching the forte of potential for realism.
There's not much you can do after you've included destructible environments outside of simply updating the gameplay every release.

Lies. Games can reach much greater heights of realism in the fps genre, however most people wouldn't buy it because they would not be able to spam grenades and rockets at everyone. Rpgs would be incredibly inneffective against mbts, individual riflemen would perhaps only be able to take three 5.56s to the chest/back, once a combatant was wounded severely they would need actual patching up and evac, firefights would be at greater distances between 75 and 200 meters, and all of you would rage at the difficulty and inability to jump your own height while hip firing an lmg.

Realistic games exist, you guys just don't play them and likely have not heard of them. An example of one, would be project reality; a mod for battlefield 2. Tanks take 15-20 minutes to spawn, can only be repaired at ammo dumps/garages, sniping takes actual skill and patience, as you are unable to lie prone and immediately make an accurate shot, no ammo counters exist, and computer and guidance systems must warm up on a tank or other vehicle before turrets can be rotated, guns fired, or helicopters take off. Did I mention the incredibly long respawn times of 45 seconds to 5 minutes to simulate redeployment of forces?


BBS Signature
naronic
naronic
  • Member since: Sep. 1, 2008
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 17
Game Developer
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 02:11 PM Reply

Rpgs would be incredibly inneffective against mbts, individual riflemen would perhaps only be able to take three 5.56s to the chest/back,

simplistic mechanics that can easily be programmed into a game if they don't already exist

once a combatant was wounded severely they would need actual patching up and evac,

Patching up? You mean medics?
And how much fun would an evac be? Where would they take you? How long would you have to stay there bored out of your mind? Wouldn't respawning just be the better option?

firefights would be at greater distances between 75 and 200 meters,

75 to 200 meters is half your throwing distance in call of duty
not to mention in bfbc2 you hardly ever get to see your assailant before you get sniped across 3 sets of obscure hillside.

Realistic games exist, you guys just don't play them and likely have not heard of them.

Are you kidding me? THEY'RE RE-RELEASED EVERY NANOSECOND LIKE GNATS REPRODUCING IN A BAKERY.

An example of one, would be project reality; a mod for battlefield 2. Tanks take 15-20 minutes to spawn, can only be repaired at ammo dumps/garages, sniping takes actual skill and patience, as you are unable to lie prone and immediately make an accurate shot, no ammo counters exist, and computer and guidance systems must warm up on a tank or other vehicle before turrets can be rotated, guns fired, or helicopters take off. Did I mention the incredibly long respawn times of 45 seconds to 5 minutes to simulate redeployment of forces?

Good, now lets just update that every few months to satisfy the red pill junkies so I can get back to flying in inter-dimensional space-time with my BFG fixated on alien foreheads.


BBS Signature
Cootie
Cootie
  • Member since: Jul. 7, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 43
Movie Buff
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 03:48 PM Reply

No popular shooting game is realistic. Even simple things such as bullets are VERY unrealistic in games like this. I would be willing to bet that 99% of the time someone gets fucking shot in real life (even with a smaller round) they don't keep moving around. They may not die (but a lot of the time they will) but I doubt they would still be moving around. If they managed to still move I doubt they would be moving very well, ya know due to the fucking piece of metal in them and ripped muscle.


For I am and forever shall be... a master ruseman.

BBS Signature
idiot-monarch
idiot-monarch
  • Member since: Mar. 24, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 19
Artist
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 03:58 PM Reply

At 6/19/11 03:24 PM, Makeshift wrote:
At 6/19/11 03:14 PM, Grubby wrote: The console version is watered down too much for me to bear.
But you know, graphics and aesthetics don't matter in games.

I won't be getting it on PC because mine is shit. I really don't think the console version is going to be too much worse. Bad Company 2 is fine right now.

Graphics aren't the only difference though. I'd say the PC version having 64 players as opposed to the 32 on the consoles is a pretty big difference.

Not to start a flame war, but from your post I got the impression that you weren't aware of this and wanted to inform you.


Latest Blog Entry - thx

BBS Signature
Richard
Richard
  • Member since: Jan. 9, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Animator
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 04:05 PM Reply

At 6/23/11 03:48 PM, Cootie wrote: No popular shooting game is realistic. Even simple things such as bullets are VERY unrealistic in games like this. I would be willing to bet that 99% of the time someone gets fucking shot in real life (even with a smaller round) they don't keep moving around. They may not die (but a lot of the time they will) but I doubt they would still be moving around. If they managed to still move I doubt they would be moving very well, ya know due to the fucking piece of metal in them and ripped muscle.

Incorrect. A soldier wearing ceramic plate can take up to three 7.62 rounds in each plate and be fine.

Having personally felt the impact of one through a plate, I can tell you that it's not unlike being punched hard as fuck and having the breath knocked out of you. Sure, you're down for a mere moment, but you'll be back in your feet in a minute or two. Course, I had a nasty ass bruise for about a month, but other than that, I was good to go. Even without protection, you'd be surprised what sort of punishment the human body can take before it will drop. Adrenaline is a crazy as shit chemical that will drive people to ignore bullet wounds as if they don't exist and keep on coming for your ass.

Basically, simulated combat realism cannot really be argued for or against unless you've seen it first hand.

Cootie
Cootie
  • Member since: Jul. 7, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 43
Movie Buff
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 04:15 PM Reply

At 6/23/11 04:05 PM, MercatorMapV2 wrote:
Basically, simulated combat realism cannot really be argued for or against unless you've seen it first hand.

I was forgetting about protection (probably a really stupid thing to forget about) but what about shots not to the chest though. I mean, in these games people get shot in the fucking face and keep running. Hell, in BC2 it takes TWO shotgun slugs to the face to bring you down with the semi-autos. I think it would be cool to have you actually fall down for a while if you get shot in the leg.


For I am and forever shall be... a master ruseman.

BBS Signature
Richard
Richard
  • Member since: Jan. 9, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Animator
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 05:37 PM Reply

At 6/23/11 04:15 PM, Cootie wrote:.


I was forgetting about protection (probably a really stupid thing to forget about) but what about shots not to the chest though. I mean, in these games people get shot in the fucking face and keep running. Hell, in BC2 it takes TWO shotgun slugs to the face to bring you down with the semi-autos. I think it would be cool to have you actually fall down for a while if you get shot in the leg.

And that is why hardcore mode is better than shit regular mode.

IronWalrus
IronWalrus
  • Member since: Apr. 22, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Blank Slate
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 23rd, 2011 @ 06:44 PM Reply

I really do anticipate this game and i think that i will play it for months on end without stopping

Cootie
Cootie
  • Member since: Jul. 7, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 43
Movie Buff
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 24th, 2011 @ 01:43 PM Reply

At 6/23/11 05:37 PM, MercatorMapV2 wrote:
And that is why hardcore mode is better than shit regular mode.

I wish I was hardcore.


For I am and forever shall be... a master ruseman.

BBS Signature
Richard
Richard
  • Member since: Jan. 9, 2011
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 05
Animator
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 24th, 2011 @ 03:03 PM Reply

At 6/23/11 02:11 PM, naronic wrote:
Rpgs would be incredibly inneffective against mbts, individual riflemen would perhaps only be able to take three 5.56s to the chest/back,
simplistic mechanics that can easily be programmed into a game if they don't already exist

And then what would happen? You lot would cry at the difficulty of the game and never play it again.


once a combatant was wounded severely they would need actual patching up and evac,
Patching up? You mean medics?
And how much fun would an evac be? Where would they take you? How long would you have to stay there bored out of your mind? Wouldn't respawning just be the better option?

Pick one. Realism, or fun. Patching up? I mean surgeons.


firefights would be at greater distances between 75 and 200 meters,
75 to 200 meters is half your throwing distance in call of duty
not to mention in bfbc2 you hardly ever get to see your assailant before you get sniped across 3 sets of obscure hillside.

Sounds like you suck and have little situational awareness. I'd love to meet a soldier who can throw a grenade 75 meters in real life. Grenade tossing is not indicative of firefight range.


Realistic games exist, you guys just don't play them and likely have not heard of them.
Are you kidding me? THEY'RE RE-RELEASED EVERY NANOSECOND LIKE GNATS REPRODUCING IN A BAKERY.

Call of duty, battlefield, and the medal of honor franchises are NOT realistic. Remove head from arse.


An example of one, would be project reality; a mod for battlefield 2. Tanks take 15-20 minutes to spawn, can only be repaired at ammo dumps/garages, sniping takes actual skill and patience, as you are unable to lie prone and immediately make an accurate shot, no ammo counters exist, and computer and guidance systems must warm up on a tank or other vehicle before turrets can be rotated, guns fired, or helicopters take off. Did I mention the incredibly long respawn times of 45 seconds to 5 minutes to simulate redeployment of forces?
Good, now lets just update that every few months to satisfy the red pill junkies so I can get back to flying in inter-dimensional space-time with my BFG fixated on alien foreheads.

Again, remove head from arse.

Cootie
Cootie
  • Member since: Jul. 7, 2006
  • Offline.
Forum Stats
Member
Level 43
Movie Buff
Response to A Thread for Battlefield 3 Jun. 24th, 2011 @ 03:46 PM Reply

I get irked when I see people bitching about getting sniped. Just move around. 99% of snipers in BC2 couldn't hit a moving target worth shit. Of course if you stand around with a thumb in your ass your gotta get your nose knocked off by a bullet.

Always keep moving, or you know... take cover until he takes a shot and kill him while he is chambering another round.


For I am and forever shall be... a master ruseman.

BBS Signature