Battlefield 3 - Official Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. said:
http://twitter.com/#!/Demize99/status/103863854584434688

Pg3oJ.jpg
Click to expand...

That is HILARIOUS! :D
 
If you played the Alpha you'd realize that while it was a good idea in theory, in practice it just didn't work out at all. Attackers would rarely make it past the subway area of the map because of this.
 
AceCR42 said:
If you played the Alpha you'd realize that while it was a good idea in theory, in practice it just didn't work out at all. Attackers would rarely make it past the subway area of the map because of this.
Click to expand...

I don't think the "spawn on teammates" or whatever was fully functional during the Alpha. When it did work though we were in a much better position to push the objective, and often did with a good enough team.
 
Gmok Bonecrusha said:
Meh. I am the opposite. I was one of those squad leaders that stayed alive, and put my squad in good places for objectives. Plus I can't stand squad hopping. PITA when you need to conatsntly give orders. But again, commander is gone...so who cares I guess.
Click to expand...

I'm the same. I really liked to work for the squad, runing through enemy lines and then hiding somweher allowing my squad do the work. I miss this so much.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Only a small amount of people care if BF3 is a true successor to BF2, a five year old game. BC@ was successful and they are going with that formula, mixed with the original BF2 gameplay.
Click to expand...

Kind of funny that just a couple months ago the big argument was about whether BF3 was a sequel or just another Bad Company game. Now the argument is whether or not anyone cares that its just another Bad Company game?

As for those that care, BF2 sold over 2M copies, I am pretty sure the fanbase cares, 5 months ago the battlefield forums were filled with people who were rather frustrated. Now the admin has banned most of them and its just a bunch of teens who never even played BF2. Even still, all their community polls have about a 10:1 ratio against consolizing the core battlefield series.

I would be happy if they could just name it BC3 and let another studio take over the core series. What they are doing now is making the impossibility of a teamplay-based battlefield game to replace BF2. Sad day for PC gamers.
 
Yea dethred, I'm just weeping about it all day. Didn't you say you were leaving this thread earlier?

And where are all these BF3 haters? Certainly not many in this thread/forum, only you and 1 or two other guys even complain about that trite nonsense. You got commrose, and still you go on with your over dramatic whining.

I think the main thing that matters is, is BF3 fun? And it sure looks like it, so I'm going to plop down my cash for it. If you want to skip it and instead make a silly internet crusade about crap nobody cares about, feel free, but you're just playin yourself imo.
 
Dethred said:
Kind of funny that just a couple months ago the big argument was about whether BF3 was a sequel or just another Bad Company game. Now the argument is whether or not anyone cares that its just another Bad Company game?

As for those that care, BF2 sold over 2M copies, I am pretty sure the fanbase cares, 5 months ago the battlefield forums were filled with people who were rather frustrated. Now the admin has banned most of them and its just a bunch of teens who never even played BF2. Even still, all their community polls have about a 10:1 ratio against consolizing the core battlefield series.

I would be happy if they could just name it BC3 and let another studio take over the core series. What they are doing now is making the impossibility of a teamplay-based battlefield game to replace BF2. Sad day for PC gamers.
Click to expand...

BC2 sold well also, should they ignore that crowd and make BF2 again with better graphics?
They combined both games into one, to satisfy everyone that's a fan of the BF series, not just the purist. BF2 wasn't a perfect game and many things that were an issue then, are being addressed now. A PC game doesn't need a steep learning curve and clunky to be a pure PC game. All it does is make the accessibility of the game more difficult. The overall goal of BF3 for DICE was to make it more accessible to a wider audience. That means the people who were annoyed by the shortcomings of BF2 will not have to go through it again. But, some people don't see it that way and will still ask for an outdated, flawed game just to say it's a true sequel.

If the game is reinvented, like BF3 is, people want DICE to keep it the same as BF2.
If BF3 kept everything the same as the original, people would say fix this and that because X was broken/unfair in BF2.

Which one is it? That's why devs only consult the community on gameplay tweaks, not game design and direction.
 
devil22 said:
Yea dethred, I'm just weeping about it all day. Didn't you say you were leaving this thread earlier?

And where are all these BF3 haters? Certainly not many in this thread/forum, only you and 1 or two other guys even complain about that trite nonsense. You got commrose, and still you go on with your over dramatic whining.

I think the main thing that matters is, is BF3 fun? And it sure looks like it, so I'm going to plop down my cash for it. If you want to skip it and instead make a silly internet crusade about crap nobody cares about, feel free, but you're just playin yourself imo.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is that his list of complaints keeps dwindling.

64 players, check
large maps, check
land, sea, air vehicles, check
Command Rose, check

So whats left? The actual commander role and only being able to spawn on a squad leader instead of anyone in your squad yet he's still crying. It's clear all he wants is a DX11 patch for BF2 and have it renamed to BF3. I for one am glad he's not on the development team.
 
+1 RamonGTP

Nothing left to say. Every "complaint" thats bitched and freaked out over later is proven to be untrue whether from a tweet from a DICE employee or video or announcement from DICE on the BF3 blog.

Id say it seems 15 outta every 20 posts on this thread are excited as hell for this game (like me), 3 outta every 20 are complaining about something (jets are going to slow!), and 2 outta every 20 are saying "Its BC3! Lame! PASS! No one will buy this game!". I think that speaks for itself.
 
Dethred said:
Kind of funny that just a couple months ago the big argument was about whether BF3 was a sequel or just another Bad Company game. Now the argument is whether or not anyone cares that its just another Bad Company game?

As for those that care, BF2 sold over 2M copies, I am pretty sure the fanbase cares, 5 months ago the battlefield forums were filled with people who were rather frustrated. Now the admin has banned most of them and its just a bunch of teens who never even played BF2. Even still, all their community polls have about a 10:1 ratio against consolizing the core battlefield series.

I would be happy if they could just name it BC3 and let another studio take over the core series. What they are doing now is making the impossibility of a teamplay-based battlefield game to replace BF2. Sad day for PC gamers.
Click to expand...

A bunch of teens who have never played BF2? I'm mildly offended by that trite nonsense. I grew up on 1942/Vietnam/BF2. If anything, it was my initiation into PC Gaming (Besides a few games of Q3A and UT99 before then).

Meaning it was my very first real experience with PC Gaming. And clearly, I liked it enough to stay on-board, despite all of the bumps in the road PC Gamers have had to deal with.

Nostalgia can do strange things to people, and sometimes I find myself wanting nothing more than HD versions of the older BF games. It's a perfectly normal thing to go through. These games were my childhood, and I would love nothing more to experience them anew, with some fancy new effects added on.

But at the same time, there were still a lot of issues with BF2. We overlooked them then because it was all we had. How many other modern military games were out there that offered 64 player combat with jets, tanks, helis, etc.? None that I can remember (and if there were, they obviously weren't good enough to compete).

I see BF3 as a chance for EA to take the core Battlefield experience we all know and love, meld it with some modern game design conventions, and add on some of the best graphics we have seen to date.

At the core, it is still a Battlefield game. Every entry into the series has had its' differences, yes, but the games were always the same at heart. Every Battlefield game has been about intense combat situations with large quantities of players and vehicles.

I felt nothing different when I played the BF3 alpha. It was still the core Battlefield experience I know and love.

You see, I didn't fall in love with a specific game. I fell in love with a specific style of game.

I think it's the exact same way for a lot of people here.
 
RamonGTP said:
Funny thing is that his list of complaints keeps dwindling.

64 players, check
large maps, check
land, sea, air vehicles, check
Command Rose, check

So whats left? The actual commander role and only being able to spawn on a squad leader instead of anyone in your squad yet he's still crying. It's clear all he wants is a DX11 patch for BF2 and have it renamed to BF3. I for one am glad he's not on the development team.
Click to expand...

It's a BF game, just not the broken one they hoped for.

TheOneKnownAsMe said:
I see BF3 as a chance for EA to take the core Battlefield experience we all know and love, meld it with some modern game design conventions, and add on some of the best graphics we have seen to date.

At the core, it is still a Battlefield game. Every entry into the series has had its' differences, yes, but the games were always the same at heart. Every Battlefield game has been about intense combat situations with large quantities of players and vehicles.

snip
Click to expand...

Good Post. My point exactly. Many times old reskinned games don't live up to the hype anyway.
Q3A reskinned would probably be a joke. Sometimes it's better to start over, and BF need that.
 
I do not understand who can still be bitching about BF3 and Dice....I will probably get this game on PS3, but it looks so good for PC it is pulling at me (and my wallet).

If your not happy from what you have seen so from Dice and BF3 then just quit playing PC games...move on to electric trains or something because you will NEVER be happy.
 
RamonGTP said:
Funny thing is that his list of complaints keeps dwindling.

64 players, check
large maps, check
land, sea, air vehicles, check
Command Rose, check

So whats left? The actual commander role and only being able to spawn on a squad leader instead of anyone in your squad yet he's still crying. It's clear all he wants is a DX11 patch for BF2 and have it renamed to BF3. I for one am glad he's not on the development team.
Click to expand...

Plus one... it's clear he is the epitome of the unsatisfiable customer that squeaks the most. I couldn't be more excited for bf3 without going into overhyped territory.
 
XvMMvX said:
I do not understand who can still be bitching about BF3 and Dice....I will probably get this game on PS3, but it looks so good for PC it is pulling at me (and my wallet).

If your not happy from what you have seen so from Dice and BF3 then just quit playing PC games...move on to electric trains or something because you will NEVER be happy.
Click to expand...

Seems like all the people bitching want is BF2, but they refuse to just go play BF2.
 
Gmok Bonecrusha said:
Meh. I am the opposite. I was one of those squad leaders that stayed alive, and put my squad in good places for objectives. Plus I can't stand squad hopping. PITA when you need to conatsntly give orders. But again, commander is gone...so who cares I guess.
Click to expand...

There was also the time when you could have the squad leader leave the squad, then spawn on the new squad leader. They eventually patched it but it was basically in the game for a while.
 
Valshistixol said:
Seems like all the people bitching want is BF2, but they refuse to just go play BF2.
Click to expand...

Yup, sad thing is if the whiners had their way all we would get is bf2 with better graphics, obviously well worth the 6 year wait...
 
Oh hey -

xj4Km.png


I guess... there's nothing left to complain about???

But if Dethred keeps bitching can someone change his title permanently to Giant Babby?
 
jonneymendoza said:
People still moaning about this game?
Click to expand...

No, just the same guy over and over.

I think it will be a good game, but I'm not getting it mainly because my connection can't even handle 32-player BFBC2, let alone 64-player BF2... let alone 64-player BF3. Singleplayer and co-op both look completely pedestrian so not much point getting the game unless they allow bots in offline play like the other PC-first BFs. For those with good connections it will be awesome.
 
RamonGTP said:
Funny thing is that his list of complaints keeps dwindling.

64 players, check
large maps, check
land, sea, air vehicles, check
Command Rose, check

So whats left? The actual commander role and only being able to spawn on a squad leader instead of anyone in your squad yet he's still crying. It's clear all he wants is a DX11 patch for BF2 and have it renamed to BF3. I for one am glad he's not on the development team.
Click to expand...

6 man squads, too.

Though with only 4 man squads, I agree that you should be abel to spawn on any squad member.

I'd actually like to see them 'pair' two 4 man squads, one a fire team the other attack. Maybe both squad leaders could communicate, like the squad leader could with the commander in BF2.
 
NathanP2007 said:
+1 RamonGTP

Nothing left to say. Every "complaint" thats bitched and freaked out over later is proven to be untrue whether from a tweet from a DICE employee or video or announcement from DICE on the BF3 blog.

Id say it seems 15 outta every 20 posts on this thread are excited as hell for this game (like me), 3 outta every 20 are complaining about something (jets are going to slow!), and 2 outta every 20 are saying "Its BC3! Lame! PASS! No one will buy this game!". I think that speaks for itself.
Click to expand...

A lot of these whiners were also saying the alpha was a near complete game and not an alpha build at all. Their reasoning was that all features were already there, despite the obvious that a lot of known features were missing and since then new features have been announced like the commo rose.
 
Still read this thread every day and still psyched! Too bad I just got booted from the clan I've been in for 15 years.
 
AceCR42 said:
If you played the Alpha you'd realize that while it was a good idea in theory, in practice it just didn't work out at all. Attackers would rarely make it past the subway area of the map because of this.
Click to expand...

It worked fantastic in BF2142. People quickly realized who the great squad leaders, and stayed in those squads. That PLUS the addition of drop pods (which was funny as hell when a bad squad leader dropped this thing too far ahead of the lines)...Was one helluva way to promote team play.
 
TheOneKnownAsMe said:
A bunch of teens who have never played BF2? I'm mildly offended by that trite nonsense. I grew up on 1942/Vietnam/BF2. If anything, it was my initiation into PC Gaming (Besides a few games of Q3A and UT99 before then).

Meaning it was my very first real experience with PC Gaming. And clearly, I liked it enough to stay on-board, despite all of the bumps in the road PC Gamers have had to deal with.

Nostalgia can do strange things to people, and sometimes I find myself wanting nothing more than HD versions of the older BF games. It's a perfectly normal thing to go through. These games were my childhood, and I would love nothing more to experience them anew, with some fancy new effects added on.

But at the same time, there were still a lot of issues with BF2. We overlooked them then because it was all we had. How many other modern military games were out there that offered 64 player combat with jets, tanks, helis, etc.? None that I can remember (and if there were, they obviously weren't good enough to compete).

I see BF3 as a chance for EA to take the core Battlefield experience we all know and love, meld it with some modern game design conventions, and add on some of the best graphics we have seen to date.

At the core, it is still a Battlefield game. Every entry into the series has had its' differences, yes, but the games were always the same at heart. Every Battlefield game has been about intense combat situations with large quantities of players and vehicles.

I felt nothing different when I played the BF3 alpha. It was still the core Battlefield experience I know and love.

You see, I didn't fall in love with a specific game. I fell in love with a specific style of game.

I think it's the exact same way for a lot of people here.
Click to expand...

So you see BF series as a bunch of vehicles and large maps with lots of people? You and I have a completely different view of it. I still play BF2, BF2142, and some BF1942 even to this day.

All I have to say is, it took massive pressure from the EA forums to even get a communication system in. This game is a massive step backwards from the previous BF games in the series in every way but destruction and graphics.

-No Commander
-No Squad leader
-No use for Medics or engineers.
-An equal emphasis on the Single player and COD ripoff modes like Team Deathmatch.

This is not a proper BF game, almost every attribute can be attributed to BC2, which DICE themselves even states was not a core BF game. This is a hack job piece of shit, but no one here is expected to realize that because their eyes are glazed over by the graphics and exposure to console ported Bad Company games.
 
So when is the beta going to be available? I suppose there won't be demo to try out like Crysis 2?
 
Dethred said:
-No Commander
-No Squad leader
-No use for Medics or engineers.
-An equal emphasis on the Single player and COD ripoff modes like Team Deathmatch.
Click to expand...
I wrote out a long reply to this and realized....im not gonna feed the troll.
 
USMCGrunt said:
I wrote out a long reply to this and realized....im not gonna feed the troll.
Click to expand...

I will.

Dethred said:
-No Commander
-No Squad leader
-No use for Medics or engineers.
-An equal emphasis on the Single player and COD ripoff modes like Team Deathmatch.
Click to expand...

No commander - Oh noes! You and the other 14 people who cared will have to deal.
No squad leader - Agreed, a bit of a bummer.
No use for medics or engineers - Are you kidding? Seriously? Dude.
An equal emphasis on the Single player and COD ripoff modes like Team Deathmatch. - LOL Where on earth did you get that little fact nugget? I can see DICE now... "Hey guys, we NEED to have our team split down the middle. One team do SP and one team to do TD. No one else focus on capture the flag, or rush, or conquest or co-op. Seriously? Dude.

I still have no idea how any of these points deem BF3 a non-BF game. You have just as much right as anyone else in this forum to spew junk; just like me. I'll argue merit and facts with you all night, however, and your last two points are just wrong.
 
Last edited:
TheOneKnownAsMe said:
A bunch of teens who have never played BF2? I'm mildly offended by that trite nonsense. I grew up on 1942/Vietnam/BF2. If anything, it was my initiation into PC Gaming (Besides a few games of Q3A and UT99 before then).

Meaning it was my very first real experience with PC Gaming. And clearly, I liked it enough to stay on-board, despite all of the bumps in the road PC Gamers have had to deal with.

Nostalgia can do strange things to people, and sometimes I find myself wanting nothing more than HD versions of the older BF games. It's a perfectly normal thing to go through. These games were my childhood, and I would love nothing more to experience them anew, with some fancy new effects added on.

But at the same time, there were still a lot of issues with BF2. We overlooked them then because it was all we had. How many other modern military games were out there that offered 64 player combat with jets, tanks, helis, etc.? None that I can remember (and if there were, they obviously weren't good enough to compete).

I see BF3 as a chance for EA to take the core Battlefield experience we all know and love, meld it with some modern game design conventions, and add on some of the best graphics we have seen to date.

At the core, it is still a Battlefield game. Every entry into the series has had its' differences, yes, but the games were always the same at heart. Every Battlefield game has been about intense combat situations with large quantities of players and vehicles.

I felt nothing different when I played the BF3 alpha. It was still the core Battlefield experience I know and love.

You see, I didn't fall in love with a specific game. I fell in love with a specific style of game.

I think it's the exact same way for a lot of people here.
Click to expand...
I agree 100%. I've seen Battlefield progress through almost every version...except the first BF Vietnam. I have played the BF3 Alpha, and I really like what I have seen. I am also not a teen...I outgrew that stage of my life 10 years ago.

Not pictured below is my Battlefield Heroes account (I felt Heroes sucked) and my BFBC2 Vietnam since ORIGIN keeps telling me it has already been claimed when I claimed BFBC2 (I bought both through Steam). In case you can't read the black CD on the left, it is BF1942 Secret Weapons of WWII ex-pack.

bffanboy1.jpg

bffanboy2.jpg
 
Last edited:
TheOneKnownAsMe said:
A bunch of teens who have never played BF2? I'm mildly offended by that trite nonsense. I grew up on 1942/Vietnam/BF2. If anything, it was my initiation into PC Gaming (Besides a few games of Q3A and UT99 before then).

Meaning it was my very first real experience with PC Gaming. And clearly, I liked it enough to stay on-board, despite all of the bumps in the road PC Gamers have had to deal with.

Nostalgia can do strange things to people, and sometimes I find myself wanting nothing more than HD versions of the older BF games. It's a perfectly normal thing to go through. These games were my childhood, and I would love nothing more to experience them anew, with some fancy new effects added on.

But at the same time, there were still a lot of issues with BF2. We overlooked them then because it was all we had. How many other modern military games were out there that offered 64 player combat with jets, tanks, helis, etc.? None that I can remember (and if there were, they obviously weren't good enough to compete).

I see BF3 as a chance for EA to take the core Battlefield experience we all know and love, meld it with some modern game design conventions, and add on some of the best graphics we have seen to date.

At the core, it is still a Battlefield game. Every entry into the series has had its' differences, yes, but the games were always the same at heart. Every Battlefield game has been about intense combat situations with large quantities of players and vehicles.

I felt nothing different when I played the BF3 alpha. It was still the core Battlefield experience I know and love.

You see, I didn't fall in love with a specific game. I fell in love with a specific style of game.

I think it's the exact same way for a lot of people here.
Click to expand...

Love battlefield and well said.
Kids have no patience, I am 47 (own the kids) and still play battlefield series due to the game-play which isn't fps shooter first but tactical and strategic.
 
RamonGTP said:
Funny thing is that his list of complaints keeps dwindling.

64 players, check
large maps, check
land, sea, air vehicles, check
Command Rose, check

So whats left? The actual commander role and only being able to spawn on a squad leader instead of anyone in your squad yet he's still crying. It's clear all he wants is a DX11 patch for BF2 and have it renamed to BF3. I for one am glad he's not on the development team.
Click to expand...

Those first three complaints were never really in doubt. Command Rose on the other hand and 3D-Spotting were only addressed thanks to the MASSIVE outcry in the alpha and EA forums where there were literally thousands of users imploring DICE to introduce the CommRose and to get rid of 3D spotting. I am willing to bet those aspects would have been left intact if not for people kicking up a monumental stink.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top