Battlefield 3 General Discussion Thread

BETA. said:
http://mp1st.com/2011/10/18/bf3-lon...tem-tweaked-and-server-browsing-for-consoles/

Good news for consoles, you guys get an in game server browser!
Click to expand...

Lucky bastards don't have to deal with fucking battlelog. If I didn't have a decent computer I would definitely buy this for a console over PC JUST for that reason.

Origin is tolerable, but battlelog's require for launching the MP/SP game is bullshit.

Glad I cancelled my pre-order and decided to wait and see how things turn out instead.
 
limitedaccess said:
It was already known much earlier that consoles would get an inferior in game browser implementation since something like Battlelog is not possible on them. Nor would Battlelog advantages really translate over to consoles as much, since they are less multipurpose machines.
Click to expand...

Ingame is better than out of game. They are getting the upper hand here. Consoles always get the goods now. Having any browser opened in the background will lower your fps and possibly lag you if the page has any ads accessing any websites. Lets just hope theres a pc version of this ingame browser coming.
 
Conker said:
Ingame is better than out of game. They are getting the upper hand here. Consoles always get the goods now. Having any browser opened in the background will lower your fps and possibly lag you if the page has any ads accessing any websites. Lets just hope theres a pc version of this ingame browser coming.
Click to expand...

Oh good lord. I am not a fan of the browser set-up but if an open browser window in the background is lowering your FPS and lagging you, get a new fucking computer -- or at the very least an upgrade.
 
limitedaccess said:
It was already known much earlier that consoles would get an inferior in game browser implementation since something like Battlelog is not possible on them. Nor would Battlelog advantages really translate over to consoles as much, since they are less multipurpose machines.
Click to expand...

Inferior is a matter of opinion. Battlelog has long been regarded as a waste of resources and time. There is literally no advantage to the battlelog system.

Lag and FPS should be a little matter, it's just the clunky annoyances of it all.
 
Conker said:
Ingame is better than out of game. They are getting the upper hand here. Consoles always get the goods now. Having any browser opened in the background will lower your fps and possibly lag you if the page has any ads accessing any websites. Lets just hope theres a pc version of this ingame browser coming.
Click to expand...

Wow. :rolleyes:
 
SilverSliver said:
Oh good lord. I am not a fan of the browser set-up but if an open browser window in the background is lowering your FPS and lagging you, get a new fucking computer -- or at the very least an upgrade.
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with getting a new computer. Its best to close out everything in the background using any cpu cycles or internet connection. Stop making excuses for the developers.
 
Conker said:
Ingame is better than out of game. They are getting the upper hand here. Consoles always get the goods now. Having any browser opened in the background will lower your fps and possibly lag you if the page has any ads accessing any websites. Lets just hope theres a pc version of this ingame browser coming.
Click to expand...

Ever heard or something called Adblock? And in the beta it had 0(ZERO) again ZERO(0) ads. But since when does a website lower your FPS?
 
Unless you set your browser to use a core your game is not using and its not using hardware acceleration then it will have minimal impact but still. I never game with a browser open in the back. Its just a waste of cpu that could be used for the game.
 
MavericK96 said:
Apparently.

http://www.dsogaming.com/news/battlefield-3-pc-leaked-12-days-before-official-release/

http://www.fudzilla.com/games/item/24503-battlefield-3-is-pirated
Click to expand...

It's pathetic that every single news site reporting about this claims the single player is fully functional. It simply is not. The game may as well have not even been leaked because nobody can do anything with it before the 25th.

Also, I actually really liked Battlelog. I really didn't see a downside to it on my system. It was easy to find friends, join servers with friends, voice chat worked, and the server browser worked just fine. Not to mention all the neat information about how well you're doing or what you're going to unlock next.

Takes a big fat dump on BF2's in game server browser, that much is for sure.

If anything, I didn't notice Origin doing anything at all. It didn't bother me since Steam does the same thing, but is it even necessary to keep it running after you've launched battlelog?
 
CPUs are barely even used in Games, the max mine got to in the BF3 beta was 35% usage or so(4 cores 8 threads). Not sure how the browser in the background will affect it when the whole CPU isn't even being used. Maybe with your Phenom it uses all 4 cores.(BC2 used about 70-80% of all cores on my 955)
 
xIronCrossx said:
CPUs are barely even used in Games, the max mine got to in the BF3 beta was 35% usage or so(4 cores 8 threads). Not sure how the browser in the background will affect it when the whole CPU isn't even being used. Maybe with your Phenom it uses all 4 cores.(BC2 used about 70-80% of all cores on my 955)
Click to expand...

I noticed pretty heavy CPU usage across all cores in the beta on my 955, but I just don't think having Chrome/Origin running idle in the background is going to make that much of a difference. I think a lot of the animosity surrounding Battlelog is resistance to change. It's different, and people fear change.
 
Conker said:
Nothing to do with getting a new computer. Its best to close out everything in the background using any cpu cycles or internet connection. Stop making excuses for the developers.
Click to expand...

Maybe a phenom needs to do this. The rest of us, in the modern age, have no problems.
 
GaNGrENe said:
Also, I actually really liked Battlelog. I really didn't see a downside to it on my system. It was easy to find friends, join servers with friends, voice chat worked, and the server browser worked just fine. Not to mention all the neat information about how well you're doing or what you're going to unlock next.

Takes a big fat dump on BF2's in game server browser, that much is for sure.
Click to expand...
+1. It was 1000x better than BC2's in game browser and I liked accessing all my character info online while at work and viewing upcoming unlocks etc. I didn't think I would like it initially, but it ended up not bothering me at all.
 
It's not different, it's useless.

Sure have a stat tracking site, but I can almost guarantee most purchasers of the game could care less.

This is a way to generate ad revenue(just wait, the ads will be there once they "finalize" battlelog more), and move traffic over their site. It serves no function that couldn't be replicated in-game with ease.

Please, tell me the benefit to battlelog? Especially since I have to use it to launch SP games.
 
limitedaccess said:
It was already known much earlier that consoles would get an inferior in game browser implementation since something like Battlelog is not possible on them. Nor would Battlelog advantages really translate over to consoles as much, since they are less multipurpose machines.
Click to expand...

Battlelog superior to in-game browser? Laughing out Loud Rolling On the Floor
 
qwertyaas said:
Funny.

BFBC2: "WHY IS THERE NO PRONE?!"

BF3: "WHY IS THERE PRONE?!"

The complaining never ends.
Click to expand...

Your quote is multipurpose!

Funny:

BFBC2: "The in-game browser is terrible."

BF3: "Why no in-game browser?"

The complaining never ends.


Also, Battlelog has prevented pirated copies of the game to be playable, an in-game browser would make the game playable for pirates.
For those of us who paid for the game, atleast you know thieves will have a hard time getting over for free.
 
Are you sure this isn't an activision game?????

anyway how the F is anyone going to play a prate game online since you have to register to get on and stay on.
That argument won't fly.
Its just to track you in some way to get money for something we just don't know yet.

Just like the BS in diablo III always connected to play a single player SUPPOSED TO BE offline game.

is everyone going digital dl or buying hard copy?
 
I'm glad that Battlelog is subject to every virus and injection that the browser is vulnerable to. That way you can hack the client to make your own servers easily and play on any password protected server. Hell you can even host your own servers without even owning a legit copy of the game.

Best addition to a hackers toolkit ever!
 
The main criticisms involving Battlelog, and the non in game browser concept really, are all really based around the idea that is isn't "traditional."

I can point out many advantages and even more potential future advantages if this idea is further explored (this type of system would actually work even better for RTS games). What exactly are the advantages to an in game browser other than it is more "traditional?"

An in game browser is not inherently faster to access and use, nor is it in practice comparing Battlelog to other in game solutions.

An in game browser is not more robust in dealing with back end issues, both solutions face the same problems if the back end has problems.

An in game solution is not safe from advertisement. In game advertisement as been there as far back as Starcraft 1. This is almost like the previous point where an issue not directly caused by or related to the out of game browser concept is being attributed to it.

The Battlelog concept is both more flexible to the end user and the developer. For the end user it offers the following -

- browse servers without needing to be in game
- if the servers you want to play on are not available, this saves you from having to load the game
- RDP access to browse and load your game away from your PC
- browse servers/setup games and multi-task much easier, such as communicating with friends
- less idle time in waiting for games to refresh, search, load, etc.
- more convenient access to your solder's information
- despite what one's personal preference, 3rd party websites have been offering this since the BF2, there is obviously demand in the BF community for this feature

What are the disadvantages to the end user?
 
sparks said:
is everyone going digital dl or buying hard copy?
Click to expand...

digital. it's funny how just a few short years ago the idea of digital downloads didn't sit well with me...now i can't imagine going to the store and buying a physical disc. in fact i did that with Portal 2 and it felt odd putting a disc in to install the game.
 
GaNGrENe said:
I noticed pretty heavy CPU usage across all cores in the beta on my 955, but I just don't think having Chrome/Origin running idle in the background is going to make that much of a difference. I think a lot of the animosity surrounding Battlelog is resistance to change. It's different, and people fear change.
Click to expand...

And some people just look for any excuse to have a good cry.

officer921 said:
Thread needs more whine. Let's whine about something that has nothing to do with gameplay.
Click to expand...

I hate Origin's icon, it's fucking orange and I hate oranges.... that's it, I'm canceling my pre-order!

Better? :D
 
No snow maps? Well, at least we get a night map for multiplayer right? based on the screenshot of it..
 
sparks said:
is everyone going digital dl or buying hard copy?
Click to expand...

I got digital since it was cheaper and I avoid 12% sales tax. Generally all the best deals so far have been digital, the current best deals are also digital.

For a game like BF3 there isn't really any inherent reason to buy physical, unless you are collector. From what I know box content isn't really anything special. Also due to the nature of the game, the physical copy doesn't really convey more of a sense of "ownership" compared to say a purely single player game.

Porter_ said:
digital. it's funny how just a few short years ago the idea of digital downloads didn't sit well with me...now i can't imagine going to the store and buying a physical disc. in fact i did that with Portal 2 and it felt odd putting a disc in to install the game.
Click to expand...

Couldn't you have just inputed the key and gotten the digital experience :p
 
my only issue with battle log is whenever im in a party with my friends and i want to join a game with them, the messages wouldnt pop up.

it used to work GREAT! then after the server-side patches it all went to shit and stopped working for me.

in order to see who just joined my party i would have to open a new tab for battle log and close the other one that i was in.

some people suggested upgrading flash, but with google chrome, that simply isnt possible...
 
Gabriel said:
No snow maps? Well, at least we get a night map for multiplayer right? based on the screenshot of it..
Click to expand...

I'm sort of ok with this. All of the BC2 snow maps left a pretty nasty taste in my mouth. I don't know what it is, something about it just makes me feel a little uneasy.

Also doesn't help that for some reason my graphics gamma goes nuts on snow maps in BC2, constantly shifting from 0 to 10 and making it impossible to see anything :p
 
limitedaccess said:
The main criticisms involving Battlelog, and the non in game browser concept really, are all really based around the idea that is isn't "traditional."

I can point out many advantages and even more potential future advantages if this idea is further explored (this type of system would actually work even better for RTS games). What exactly are the advantages to an in game browser other than it is more "traditional?"

An in game browser is not inherently faster to access and use, nor is it in practice comparing Battlelog to other in game solutions.

An in game browser is not more robust in dealing with back end issues, both solutions face the same problems if the back end has problems.

An in game solution is not safe from advertisement. In game advertisement as been there as far back as Starcraft 1. This is almost like the previous point where an issue not directly caused by or related to the out of game browser concept is being attributed to it.

The Battlelog concept is both more flexible to the end user and the developer. For the end user it offers the following -

- browse servers without needing to be in game
- if the servers you want to play on are not available, this saves you from having to load the game
- RDP access to browse and load your game away from your PC
- browse servers/setup games and multi-task much easier, such as communicating with friends
- less idle time in waiting for games to refresh, search, load, etc.
- more convenient access to your solder's information
- despite what one's personal preference, 3rd party websites have been offering this since the BF2, there is obviously demand in the BF community for this feature

What are the disadvantages to the end user?
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a community demand, it's more "we are lazy dev's under EA's development cycle so we're going to do it backasswards".

RDP has no benefit whether in-game or browser based.

Everything other benefit you listed can be listed the same for in-game, just in-game looks better and more polished rather than cheezy website access. You get the "game experience" while doing the exact same thing.

Keep the battlelog for the 5% that like to stroke epeens and look at their soliders, let the rest of us play the game properly without having to worry about the battlelog add-on becoming virus laden or breaking due to a chrome/mozilla/IE update that is incompatible with it.
 
Inate8 said:
I don't think it's a community demand, it's more "we are lazy dev's under EA's development cycle so we're going to do it backasswards".

RDP has no benefit whether in-game or browser based.

Everything other benefit you listed can be listed the same for in-game, just in-game looks better and more polished rather than cheezy website access. You get the "game experience" while doing the exact same thing.

Keep the battlelog for the 5% that like to stroke epeens and look at their soliders, let the rest of us play the game properly without having to worry about the battlelog add-on becoming virus laden or breaking due to a chrome/mozilla/IE update that is incompatible with it.
Click to expand...

RDP is a benefit which can be realized as more people get mobile devices. What can you do in the future possibly? What if I can remote in and pick a server using my WP7 phone as I am watching TV, walking up the stairs or whatever and have the game fully loaded and in the map as soon as I sit down?

It is more convenient and faster to actually use battlelog purely to browser servers, or for those that want to browse stats, compared to having to load the entire game to get to the browser.

You also have the convenience of being able to easily multitask while doing this by shifting the browser to a secondary screen, or maximizing to only half the screen, because the browser is not in game and taking up full screen. This frees you do other things instead of idling the browser.
 
limitedaccess said:
RDP is a benefit which can be realized as more people get mobile devices. What can you do in the future possibly? What if I can remote in and pick a server using my WP7 phone as I am watching TV, walking up the stairs or whatever and have the game fully loaded and in the map as soon as I sit down?

It is more convenient and faster to actually use battlelog purely to browser servers, or for those that want to browse stats, compared to having to load the entire game to get to the browser.

You also have the convenience of being able to easily multitask while doing this by shifting the browser to a secondary screen, or maximizing to only half the screen, because the browser is not in game and taking up full screen. This frees you do other things instead of idling the browser.
Click to expand...

ALT+Tab functions being supported = multitask to your hearts content.

RDP can be done in the method you mention whether it's in-game based, browser, or not, hence that "benefit" you list is minimal at best. RDP is there-fore a non-issue since both experiences allow the benefit you are outlining.

Streamlining the loading process(allowing the skipping of intro cinematics/logos) allows this speed you talk of to be a non-issue as well. Yet in-game you get the benefit of the "in-game" experience.

I found myself getting distracted by all sorts of other crap whilst waiting for a game to load using the battlelog. Enough so that I missed queues a number of times. That was frustrating while waiting for my chance to play caspian.

Again, using in-game avoids browser issues cropping up in the future.
 
The actual browsing is better in the browser. The in-game browser in battlefield is good, but it is always clunky and unresponsive.
 
You're saying it is crap because you got distracted. Good support to your argument.
 
xIronCrossx said:
But since when does a website lower your FPS?
Click to expand...
I have seen it happen before, but it had zero to do with using cpu cycles. I saw it happen last year with a select combination of AMD video card drivers, having chrome web browser open to a few flash enabled websites, and playing Bad Company 2 at the same time. In that case it had to do with video card drivers and Adobe flash acceleration, and it left the video card at 2D clocks. I would be playing BC2 and Windows 7 would pop up saying the video card performance had declined and asking me if I wanted to turn off Aero. Using a different set of drivers and also a software update for adobe flash fixed it. Other than that special case, the last time I ever worried about a web browser stealing performance while playing a game was maybe 2003 or 2004 with single core processors, running 1GB of RAM on windows XP. It shouldn't be an issue in this day and age. Vista and Win7 multi-task so well with multi-core cpu's and plenty of RAM that no one should even be worried about a web browser stealing performance in all but the rarest of circumstances (like the one I mentioned).

A web browser sitting open on Battlelog uses close to zero cpu cycles, and I'm fairly certain it doesn't use flash acceleration either. If there is a concern about having a web browser open sucking performance from the computer, then that person should close all other browser tabs and leave only battlelog open. If there is a performance degradation while having only battlelog open, then it is either the browser or the pc itself is too shitty to play BF3 in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top