Battlefield 3 General Discussion Thread

Spidey329 said:
Having an ingame browser and non-ingame browser is not that hard. Most coding bases have a browser base built-in that ties directly into the OS browser (IE in this case) for its browsing. Just like you can easily drop a browser window into an Android app or a windows script. It's already there.

It's actually more resource intensive to code for an out of game browser-based system because you to test against so many versions/programs (Chrome, FireFox, IE, etc.) and setups. Every one may display differently, something that an ingame browser does not deal with because it only needs to be coded for that one particular program.
Click to expand...

I can't speak for any of the languages used for coding these games but I do know a little bit about HTML and error checking and correction is most likely a lot faster and simpler to do in HTML then it is in whatever language Frostbite 2 is written in.

The point still stands, and I personally believe its a big one, that not having to issue a patch anytime they need/want to make changes or additions to it is invaluable. I mean, think about it. In order for them to have issued a patch adding loadout changes to an ingame browser would require the coding obviously, but then they'd have to run it through extensive QA testing internally to ensure they didn't break any other part of the game interface. Once that's done, they'd have to work through the logistics of getting the patch out to people, ensuring they have the master servers geared up to handle the load and then there's still the possibility of their being bugs that got through or weren't seen on the system configs they had inhouse for QA. Isolate the new bug they introduced, develop the new patch, rinse and repeat till bug occurence levels are below whatever threshold they use.

Granted, these are all processes that DICE has done in the past and can do with ease but, look at how it can work on a web based platform. Code the new feature into a standardized platform that's, most likely (I imagine), a lot less complicated. QA goes through the testing that's most likely a lot quicker (again, guessing) and then the new code is uploaded to the master server for all to consume. If something goes wrong and a bug pops up, you pull the update and revert back to the fully functioning version and all your customers are relatively happy again. Find the issue, correct it, and reupload it to the master server.

Now, both processes are fairly similar and from my limited viewpoint I can't factually say that it costs less money for them to go with Battlelog. What I can say though for sure, is that the end user goes through a lot less headache, has to do a lot less to play the game, and assumingly, has to deal with a lot less headaches.
 
If we want to talk about useful features.....why cant DICE think about this simple fucking solutions for all the stupid fucks that like to have the same squad specialization as the other. Either make it so it warns the player of a duplicate specialization and cannot select, or automatically selects another.

I am so tired of having to look at each squad to find a group that understands this and are trying to benefit the squad.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Killing floor was a UT mod, and is UE 2.5 (I think, maybe 2.0). But it uses steam for something...
Click to expand...

gotcha, I cant keep all the 'mods gone game' straight, thought 90% of them are unreal or source based and they all look outdate :p

defiant007 said:
Thousands? I think that kool-aid is making you vulnerable to hyperbole.
Click to expand...

yeah thousands, I have 200 games on steam and its not even cracking thr surface on available games?

try posting something back instead of sprewing about koolaid :rolleyes:

I have no problem point out flaws of BF3

no commander
shitty voip
classic bf hit detection
classic dice patch processes(though IMO this has been a little better for them)


but battlelog is no where on my list sorry, I like it, alot

compared to trying to get games together in splinter cell or finding servers in COD browser, which now I havent done in ages since I barely played blops and mw3) its a far superior platform for someone that doesnt spend hours and hours in game

the biggest issue I have found with it is the XONAR shit breaks sometimes and I have to kill it and reopen the browser to allow me to join party voice correctly
 
haunter said:
yeah thousands, I have 200 games on steam and its not even cracking thr surface on available games?
Click to expand...

So those 200 games, of the thousands released, they all require the use of a server browser right? :rolleyes:

haunter said:
try posting something back instead of sprewing about koolaid :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Believe me I have already posted plenty on the subject during the beta, alpha and post retail release, but there is always a contingent of mouth breathers who cannot get it through their thick heads that maybe.....just maybe....some people just prefer having more options rather than less. Saying to me that it is not feasible is clearly not a valid excuse seeing as it hasn't stopped other developers from adopting the same implementation. Anyway I don't really see any point in engaging in circuitous debates with you on the subject.
 
sorry. feasible yeah, waste of $$$? generally.

more work for a feature you already have and would be basically duplicating

even if it is a similar coding environment its still adding alot of QA and bugfixing

there are other things I would rahter have a DEV work on than multiple server brrowsers

it would be more of a moot point if games had a longer shelf life these days
 
haunter said:
sorry. feasible yeah, waste of $$$? generally.

more work for a feature you already have and would be basically duplicating

even if it is a similar coding environment its still adding alot of QA and bugfixing

there are other things I would rahter have a DEV work on than multiple server brrowsers

it would be more of a moot point if games had a longer shelf life these days
Click to expand...

I know i've already said this but BF3 has excellent entertainment value in comparison to most other forms of entertainment. Since release ive got about 330 hours of playtime and I still haven't completed all the awards. Do the math and ive paid $3.30/hour to play BF3, and thats as a premium member as well. Obviously YMMV depending on how much you play but its still pretty damn good deal.
 
The most frustrating thing about the game is that the issues are FIXABLE and don't get FIXED ever.

It's like trying to fuck with your clothes on. Kind of works but...
 
USMCGrunt said:
Since release ive got about 330 hours of playtime and I still haven't completed all the awards. Do the math and ive paid $3.30/hour to play BF3, and thats as a premium member as well.
Click to expand...

I think you mean about 30 cents per hour, right?
 
What the hell is up with lag these last few days? Every server you get something like lag storms. I was taking off at Karg island going straight up. Then the game stops, next screen I get I am standing on the shore and then my plane falls on top of me! lol

Not just me either. The whole server started commenting on the weird lag. It has happened every time I have played for the last three days. Any news on it? Last I heard EA didn't know what was causing it.
 
Would totally buy premium if they added GOOD VOIP. Its sad that they obviously have the money for it... but they just don't do it.
 
USMCGrunt said:
I can't speak for any of the languages used for coding these games but I do know a little bit about HTML and error checking and correction is most likely a lot faster and simpler to do in HTML then it is in whatever language Frostbite 2 is written in.
Click to expand...

I've been doing web coding for about 14 years now, so I too understand the ease of HTML, which is why I stated that it's way less intensive to code for one browser over all of the browsers. However, perhaps I wasn't clear with my post. The ingame browser would use HTML/CSS but just be placed IN GAME. I've seen games do this. It's a simple process. Because the in-game browser is just their own browser, they'd only need to code for that one particular viewer and how it handles the code, instead of being compliant/testing every browser combination.

Even the most "compliant" sites still have viewing discrepancies between browsers. Most sites will have to load various subsets of code/css to get viewed correctly by all of them. God forbid you actually still want to support IE6 ...

Hence, it actually saves coding resources if they're doing just one viewer. That was my point, it doesn't waste resources as implied.
 
Last edited:
Anyone else think that since the last update all servers have been a hack fest and generally suck hard core?
 
Shikami said:
If we want to talk about useful features.....why cant DICE think about this simple fucking solutions for all the stupid fucks that like to have the same squad specialization as the other. Either make it so it warns the player of a duplicate specialization and cannot select, or automatically selects another.

I am so tired of having to look at each squad to find a group that understands this and are trying to benefit the squad.
Click to expand...

The obvious solution is to make perks stack so if you have 4 people with speed you can run around like cheetahs.
 
Spidey329 said:
I've been doing web coding for about 14 years now, so I too understand the ease of HTML, which is why I stated that it's way less intensive to code for one browser over all of the browsers. However, perhaps I wasn't clear with my post. The ingame browser would use HTML/CSS but just be placed IN GAME. I've seen games do this. It's a simple process. Because the in-game browser is just their own browser, they'd only need to code for that one particular viewer and how it handles the code, instead of being compliant/testing every browser combination.

Even the most "compliant" sites still have viewing discrepancies between browsers. Most sites will have to load various subsets of code/css to get viewed correctly by all of them. God forbid you actually still want to support IE6 ...

Hence, it actually saves coding resources if they're doing just one viewer. That was my point, it doesn't waste resources as implied.
Click to expand...

Intersting...didn't really think that they could do that...though I don't see why I didn't think of it being that easy, lol. Though to make things simple, it appears Battlelog only officially supports IE 8+, Firefox 4+, and Chrome...at least prior to it being released. That cuts down on needing to test for compatibility, source: http://www.egmnow.com/articles/news/dice-announces-battlefield-3-battlelog-supported-web-browsers/ .



In other news, I just noticed on the calendar that Premium accounts are getting two seperate premium events this month, one is a double XP event and the other doesnt say what it is. Halfway through the month now, something should be hitting soon...also curious when that bonus content for the month, aka Armored Kill, is gonna hit.
 
At the very least the assignments offer something to break up the monotony. Unless it's another fucking F2000 assignment
 
USMCGrunt said:
Intersting...didn't really think that they could do that...though I don't see why I didn't think of it being that easy, lol. Though to make things simple, it appears Battlelog only officially supports IE 8+, Firefox 4+, and Chrome...at least prior to it being released. That cuts down on needing to test for compatibility, source: http://www.egmnow.com/articles/news/dice-announces-battlefield-3-battlelog-supported-web-browsers/ .



In other news, I just noticed on the calendar that Premium accounts are getting two seperate premium events this month, one is a double XP event and the other doesnt say what it is. Halfway through the month now, something should be hitting soon...also curious when that bonus content for the month, aka Armored Kill, is gonna hit.
Click to expand...

the second event could be the premium access to AK, which is due in septermber
 
Game is unplayable at times. What has changed? Did they fuck up the netcode more or is it hacker lag?
 
socK said:
The obvious solution is to make perks stack so if you have 4 people with speed you can run around like cheetahs.
Click to expand...

That would be awesome for a little while, then it would suck. Imagine 64man Metro servers that has a squad with two explosive and two frag perks enabled for a single squad. Heh.

spaceman said:
Game is unplayable at times. What has changed? Did they fuck up the netcode more or is it hacker lag?
Click to expand...

I played a few rounds over the weekend, I didn't notice anything crazy with the netcode. Maybe turn off utorrent? =)
 
No the lag is real and not me. I know how to setup my system bf lol. I think it is either pb or a driver issue.
 
Last edited:
spaceman said:
Game is unplayable at times. What has changed? Did they fuck up the netcode more or is it hacker lag?
Click to expand...

Depends on when your talking about. There's been two instances in the last few months where the game was lagging so bad it was damn near unplayable. I know the first time was an issue with PB but this last time I never looked it up to see if they knew what the cause was but as of last night, its been playing wonderfully.
 
I played last night. I hadn't noticed any weird lag. But I strive to make sure I'm 50ms servers from me.
 
OFaceSIG said:
I played last night. I hadn't noticed any weird lag. But I strive to make sure I'm 50ms servers from me.
Click to expand...

Ya, the PB thing had something to do with PB taking excessive screenshots or something like that, it was causing the game to freeze for a split second or more every few seconds, regardless of latency to server...was horrible.
 
fallguy said:
Just because it is set to be modern times still, doesn't mean it will be a .1 version of BF3. If that's the case, then any sequel that takes place about the same time frame is just a .1 addition. Thats just silly. Dont let your agenda get in the way.
Click to expand...

Battlefield has historically changed time period, theme and/or settings for each successive game. Considering how much of a rehash the Battlefield franchise's new idol (COD 1-25) is, Expect almost the exact same game. They've chosen a business model instead of making a great game, so its a safe bet to expect more of the same, which is the core of that business model.

Edit: Not to mention, the non-info coming from Troedsson sounds just like his non-sense for BF3. Say nothing in your answer but make vague hints that you'll look into making your game something more than a steaming pile of shit.
 
fallguy said:
Just because it is set to be modern times still, doesn't mean it will be a .1 version of BF3. If that's the case, then any sequel that takes place about the same time frame is just a .1 addition. Thats just silly. Dont let your agenda get in the way.
Click to expand...

What exactly is going to change from BF3 to BF4? It's the same setting with the same game engine. Is it going to be even more consolized?
 
Ugh. I really, really want a new drug. This is BF RE-HASH and I seriously doubt it will be anything different than the same old shit but hope for the best.

I also hope for a liam neeson sized cock and world peace.
 
I am half tempted to put up a private server for a month to get all unlocks/achievements lol.....i just dont play enough/have enough time to do them normally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top