Battlefield 3 - Official Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I highly doubt it's scripted gameplay. Gameplay testers have tweeted that they've actually played this part of the game.
 
Um... when you reload a M4 because you ran out of rounds in a mag, it locks the bolt to the rear. You put another mag in, and slap bolt release on the left side to put the bolt forward, and another round in the chamber. It really annoys me how this doesnt happen. They are going to such lengths for accurate sound, how about just an accurate reload. They simply just put in another mag and keep firing. This does not work.

Im still getting it day 1.
 
fallguy said:
Um... when you reload a M4 because you ran out of rounds in a mag, it locks the bolt to the rear. You put another mag in, and slap bolt release on the left side to put the bolt forward, and another round in the chamber. It really annoys me how this doesnt happen. They are going to such lengths for accurate sound, how about just an accurate reload. They simply just put in another mag and keep firing. This does not work.

Im still getting it day 1.
Click to expand...

I just hope that when you change out mags, you actually lose that mag rather than it simply topping up your bullets and deducting them from your overall. BF2 did this actually; if you shot 1 round, reloaded, you'd still lose that whole mag with 29 or so rounds.
 
SUPERGT said:
I just hope that when you change out mags, you actually lose that mag rather than it simply topping up your bullets and deducting them from your overall. BF2 did this actually; if you shot 1 round, reloaded, you'd still lose that whole mag with 29 or so rounds.
Click to expand...

I read a really good suggestion in some other forums that it take it a step further. Instead of losing the entire mag OR recycling the bullets, keep the partial mag in your inventory. Example: #1(5bullets) #2(10bullets) #3(2bullets) Assuming you are reloading, you pick the heaviest mag, the one with 10 bullets. You fire some and then hit reload, you switch to the next heaviest mag.

Makes sense to me.
 
Buckiller said:
I read a really good suggestion in some other forums that it take it a step further. Instead of losing the entire mag OR recycling the bullets, keep the partial mag in your inventory. Example: #1(5bullets) #2(10bullets) #3(2bullets) Assuming you are reloading, you pick the heaviest mag, the one with 10 bullets. You fire some and then hit reload, you switch to the next heaviest mag.

Makes sense to me.
Click to expand...

Ah ok. That's what happens in Red Orchestra.
 
I would REALLY like to see some sort of tracers towards the end of the mag. To let you know you are about out, without having to look. Thats how its done in real life, so take it a step further and do it in the game.
 
SUPERGT said:
I just hope that when you change out mags, you actually lose that mag rather than it simply topping up your bullets and deducting them from your overall. BF2 did this actually; if you shot 1 round, reloaded, you'd still lose that whole mag with 29 or so rounds.
Click to expand...

i like that about BF2 - it makes you think twice before you reload. do you run around with only 10 rounds in your mag hoping it's enough when you engage the next enemy, or do you sacrifice those 10 rounds so that you're better prepared with a full mag? it adds a level of strategy and a little bit of tension if you decide to be frugal and run around with a partially empty magazine.
 
Porter_ said:
i like that about BF2 - it makes you think twice before you reload. do you run around with only 10 rounds in your mag hoping it's enough when you engage the next enemy, or do you sacrifice those 10 rounds so that you're better prepared with a full mag? it adds a level of strategy and a little bit of tension if you decide to be frugal and run around with a partially empty magazine.
Click to expand...

I won't be particularly crushed if BF3 doesnt have this, but it is a pretty neat feature.
 
Plague_Injected said:
I won't be particularly crushed if BF3 doesnt have this, but it is a pretty neat feature.
Click to expand...

+1, yeah in real life thats great, but in real life you dont have a digital HUD telling you exactly how many rounds you have, which you do in video games. However i do love the idea and thought of it myself is exactly what Buckiller said. Lets be fully real, you dont drop your mag in the sand or dirt (granted in some situations i presume soldiers do) you put it in your side bag (forget what its called) or you might even put it in a spot on your vest. Once out of full mags, you go back to the ones with only 10 rounds or 5 rounds left. (Granted in RL you might ask for one from another soldier).
 
fallguy said:
Um... when you reload a M4 because you ran out of rounds in a mag, it locks the bolt to the rear. You put another mag in, and slap bolt release on the left side to put the bolt forward, and another round in the chamber. It really annoys me how this doesnt happen. They are going to such lengths for accurate sound, how about just an accurate reload. They simply just put in another mag and keep firing. This does not work.

Im still getting it day 1.
Click to expand...
Yea, that irked me. He does just swap the mag out on the fourth reload though, odd.
 
I love the way everyone is ripping this game apart, and yet the thread itself is just ballooning.

Most of you guys remind me of the woman who's distraught over the asshole male who treats her like shit - but instead of just dumping him, like any sane person would, she obsesses over him, and wants him in her life.

i.e. the more you rant and rave, the more you're showing how much you actually do fucking care.
 
So? We care so much that we're willing to point out its' flaws in hopes that they're fixed. At least it's not as bad as the Skyrim thread.
 
TheOneKnownAsMe said:
So? We care so much that we're willing to point out its' flaws in hopes that they're fixed. At least it's not as bad as the Skyrim thread.
Click to expand...

Because of course the Dice employees are feverishly reading through this thread and takin the 'criticisms' to heart. :rolleyes:
 
WabeWalker said:
I love the way everyone is ripping this game apart, and yet the thread itself is just ballooning.

Most of you guys remind me of the woman who's distraught over the asshole male who treats her like shit - but instead of just dumping him, like any sane person would, she obsesses over him, and wants him in her life.

i.e. the more you rant and rave, the more you're showing how much you actually do fucking care.
Click to expand...

We obviously do care. BF2 is one of the best of all time (and 1942 before that supposedly, I didn't didn't start gaming on PC during that time) and this game is it's sequel. From the trailer it looked a lot like MW style play... but there was an interview later http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gdc-11-battlefield-3/711179 that mentions that DICE thinks they know us best.... I hope so.

And apparently they are just hoarding the multiplayer vids until soon before release to build the hype up.
 
WabeWalker said:
I love the way everyone is ripping this game apart, and yet the thread itself is just ballooning.

Most of you guys remind me of the woman who's distraught over the asshole male who treats her like shit - but instead of just dumping him, like any sane person would, she obsesses over him, and wants him in her life.

i.e. the more you rant and rave, the more you're showing how much you actually do fucking care.
Click to expand...

Only one or two people are complaining - the rest of us are pretty pleased and almost excited.

Try learning to count.
 
Last edited:
Buckiller said:
We obviously do care. BF2 is one of the best of all time (and 1942 before that supposedly, I didn't didn't start gaming on PC during that time) and this game is it's sequel. From the trailer it looked a lot like MW style play... but there was an interview later http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gdc-11-battlefield-3/711179 that mentions that DICE thinks they know us best.... I hope so.

And apparently they are just hoarding the multiplayer vids until soon before release to build the hype up.
Click to expand...

Microsoft knows you best as well, and knows what's best for you. Remember that.
 
I think no matter how awesome a game looks or plays, there is going to be something that isn't either accurate or is wrong with it.

Now that we have some previews of a war shooter game that looks amazing, awesome looking weapon recoil and sounds, realistic blood, intense fighting. Now we are complaining that the guns are 100% accurate on how they reload? Seriously...
 
Plague_Injected said:
Only one or two people are complaining - the rest of us are pretty pleased and almost excited.

Try learning to count.
Click to expand...

I hadn't realized that through 47 pages only 'one or two' people were complaining.

Wait a minute? One or two - or one or two hundred?
 
WabeWalker said:
I hadn't realized that through 47 pages only 'one or two' people were complaining.

Wait a minute? One or two - or one or two hundred?
Click to expand...

It's actually a lot closer to 1 or 2 then it is to 100. Most of the 47 pages is talking about how awesome the game is going to be. The rest of the 47 pages is bickering back and forth with the very few people who are ripping the game. If one person complains for 10 pages, that doesn't mean there are 10 pages of complaints.Perhaps you should pay closer attention if you're going to comment on something.
 
The game is still 6 months away so complaining is totally justified in hopes that the makers might tweak a few things before release. The ammo thing is something they could change. The demo was pre-alpha so that alone should give you indication how much was probably left out. The voice acting for instance wasnt stellar compared to the sfx. The running while turning isn't life-like, you could see the soldier sort of careening like a car would, when in real life a person would slow down his steps when turning. Another thing is the lack of commander feature, granted not alot used it but it drasticly distinguished every match and made each match unique. Instead of aiming for the same objective, destroying the same building, following the same person every single match, that was in BC2 and thats why they forced you to swtch between defense and attack. A commander feature could make each match different without resorting to changing sides even when you dont want to. Also US soldiers dont hold AK-47s or whatever, thats so wrong.
 
Last edited:
US soldiers sometimes PREFERRED the ak 47 to the m16 in Vietnam. Mostly due to the early M16s having reliability issues. Nothing sucks like getting shot at and having your gun take a dump on you.

So yeah. I think you should be able to pick weapons up but not necessarily be able to select them unless you are on that side.
 
spaceman said:
US soldiers sometimes PREFERRED the ak 47 to the m16 in Vietnam. Mostly due to the early M16s having reliability issues. Nothing sucks like getting shot at and having your gun take a dump on you.

So yeah. I think you should be able to pick weapons up but not necessarily be able to select them unless you are on that side.
Click to expand...

Thats what I meant, you can pick up whatever of course but selecting should be limited by faction.
 
Plague_Injected said:
Only one or two people are complaining - the rest of us are pretty pleased and almost excited.

Try learning to count.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I see a lot of positive comments and a good discussion

Indeed, I'd say this is one of the more positive threads, unlike say the DA2 Demo thread that is being propped up by a crazed zealot, that gets defensive when ever you criticise the slightest thing.

The rhetoric and strange analogies by a certain member of these boards borders on the bizarre.
 
Last edited:
spicey said:
Agreed, I see a lot of positive comments and a good discussion

Indeed, I'd say this one one of the more positive threads, unlike say the DA2 Demo thread that is being propped up by a crazed zealot, that gets defensive when ever you criticise the slightest thing.

The rhetoric and strange analogies by a certain member of these boards boarders on the bizarre.
Click to expand...

You sir have made my night. :cool:
 
spicey said:
Agreed, I see a lot of positive comments and a good discussion

Indeed, I'd say this one one of the more positive threads, unlike say the DA2 Demo thread that is being propped up by a crazed zealot, that gets defensive when ever you criticise the slightest thing.

The rhetoric and strange analogies by a certain member of these boards boarders on the bizarre.
Click to expand...

lol, well said
 
timtheenchantor said:
IMO it opens up to too many "shooting fish in a barrel" scenarios.
Click to expand...

not sure what you mean, but medics need an upgrade, you shouldnt be able to use defib so quickly to revive someone. You should I think only revive people after you taken position and kicked out the enemy.
 
How long, in a gaming scenario (specifically multiplayer) will someone sit there and wait for a gun fight to be over and be revived? I can see people waiting and getting frustrated at the wait.

I can also see an issue with dragging someone away, as it opens up that medic to sniper fire because he can't defend himself. Thinking from a game developer perspective, I can see players getting frustrated that they just can't quick revive someone and be on their way. In a timed match, time is of the essence and having potentially two players out of the fight for an indiscriminate amount of time is a little much. On top of having it dependent on firefight outcome? What if it's a central area of the map? Thinking from a network engineer, developing the game to include latency and other factors in coding the behavior of "dragging" another player in multiplayer will just complicate things. But I am a little naive on that.

These are little issues I see.
 
Somethin to consider is that the reason they don't show the bolt locked back on an empty mag is possibly the game stops you at 29 rounds leaving one in the chamber. You put another full mag in with 30 rounds and you are set to fire off 30 and still leave one in the chamber...possible the game does that for you...just a theory though, not sure if they play the sound of the bolt locking back or not.


Overall, this game will be frigid saweet
 
a quote: "The hurdle is to make sure that we lower the threshold to get into the game by letting everyone try it out. The running and gunning should be extremely accessible. That’s something we’re working toward with every iteration of the game while deepening the game so once you get hooked, there’s enough depth to play to get people to come back."

"We could implement it but the question 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 liked 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 more 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 numbers you could also say that no one uses it. We tried in Bad Company 2 to give that to the 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 where the boundaries are for keeping the strategic depth and complexity while lowering the threshold to get in."

http://www.gameinformer.com/games/b.../03/04/talking-battlefield-3-multiplayer.aspx

good or bad? I think its a shame.
 
Last edited:
Does anyone know what the number to the right of the ammo in the mag is, in the fault line trailer? During the gun fight at the end of the trailer, he reload a couple times, but the number beside the mag number seems to read 272 the whole way through. i thought this was total ammo, but I may be wrong. I was trying to see what happened when he reloads at the end before the rpg with 19 rounds still in his magazine, but am having difficulty see the number. it looks like it doesnt change when he reloads, but instead counts down slowly from 272, to 271, to 270 before the scripted action rpg scene. Does anyone know what I am talking about?
 
Oh I'm down if a squad leader has access to UAV and other toys, you don't need a commander in such much in this case.. Sometime it was tough to cover 3 or 4 squads in BF2 and a commander had to choose which squad should get the UAV... I'm assuming that stuff like air strike will be left to a kill streak, it seems popular these days.

The only part I don't like is "running and gunning should be extremely accessible" comment, even in BC2 running and gunning gets you nowhere. I wonder what the mean by that.
 
woah, the building that falls.
EPIC.

Comments on the video haha :

"some people would go to jail for hot 17 year olds, we gamers have developers that would rather go to jail in order to show us Battlefield footage."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top