• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Battlefield 3 - Official Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Of course it will support at least 64 players. It's a sequel to BF2, not bad company 2.
 
It aint BF without jets (and helicopters, tanks, huge maps, etc.) :D
 
Never played Battlefield 2 but I did play a ton of BF1942. Very curious about this one.

Hope there will be AC-130 Gunships and a justification to buy a new joystick.
 
http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/bat.../04/battlefield-3-is-coming-preorder-now.aspx

Battlefield 3 is the true successor to Battlefield 2. Beyond our signature multiplayer, we have also included a full single-player campaign and a co-op campaign – all straight out of the box. As for fan favorite features, how does the return of jets, prone, and 64-player multiplayer (on PC) sound? All this built with our powerful new game engine Frostbite 2, which you'll hear and see a lot of in the months leading up to launch. For the full reveal on Battlefield 3, stay tuned for links to our cover stories hitting the gaming press throughout February, starting with Game Informer right now.

Battlefield 3 will release this Fall. The exact contents of the Limited Edition will be revealed around GDC.
Click to expand...

jizz
 
Cue someone here figuring something else to bitch about, namely that its getting a console release.

As for me I don't care, bring 64 players, new engine, I'm satisfied.
 
crackbone said:
Cue someone here figuring something else to bitch about, namely that its getting a console release.

As for me I don't care, bring 64 players, new engine, I'm satisfied.
Click to expand...

u sound as if pc fans dont want a good proper BF game. the reason why we fucking bitch is because WE WANT A PROPER BF GAME!!
 
I wish we could have more than 64 players by now, but I'm happy it's back to 64 at least. I think I'm just gonna pre-order now. :D
 
In all honesty if it's only 64 players I'm gonna be disappointed. I mean we had 64 players in what 2002 with bf 1942? I would expect 9 years later to be at 128 at least. Either way this is a preorder for me and I'm pumped. We've been waiting forever for a true BF sequel.
 
Savoy said:
In all honesty if it's only 64 players I'm gonna be disappointed. I mean we had 64 players in what 2002 with bf 1942? I would expect 9 years later to be at 128 at least. Either way this is a preorder for me and I'm pumped. We've been waiting forever for a true BF sequel.
Click to expand...

You know it doesn't exactly scale that well like that? The amount of data being transferred these days in MP shooters like Battlefield is staggering not to mention what it'll be like with BF3.
 
£39.99? It seems to be going the MW route here. I hope that's just preliminary pricing and they're not getting optimistic with the pricing because BC2 sold well. Love Battlefield but don't want to see it turned into the next CoD style cash-cow.
 
Well, let's put it this way. If the PC version is 64 player and the console is only 24 player, what that suggests to me is that the game is built for PC and then trimmed for console. As a practical matter, can you have 24 people play on a map designed for 64? No. Can you cram 64 people into a map built for 24? Not really. They are probably doing what they did with BF2.

Throw in the better destructability, and some DX11 features like tesselation (which they will probably use in some form), the better lighting systems, and we've already pretty much got the game we want.
 
TheToE! said:
It's none of my business and all but, why? I'm just curious.
Click to expand...

I like the Battlefield series and have owned/played every single one so far, I don't see BF3 being any different. :cool:

I wish I had a discount this time though. I had a 25% discount when I pre-ordered BC2 and EA got it to my door on release day. :D
 
Blackstone said:
Well, let's put it this way. If the PC version is 64 player and the console is only 24 player, what that suggests to me is that the game is built for PC and then trimmed for console. As a practical matter, can you have 24 people play on a map designed for 64? No. Can you cram 64 people into a map built for 24? Not really. They are probably doing what they did with BF2.

Throw in the better destructability, and some DX11 features like tesselation (which they will probably use in some form), the better lighting systems, and we've already pretty much got the game we want.
Click to expand...

The limit with player count on consoles is lack of dedicated servers.
 
It looks like I will be getting back into the BF scene. I havent touched an online FPS in years. Maybe since BF2! Can't wait, this is all sounding like DICE is finally rewarding those that made them who they are today.
 
gentoo said:
You know it doesn't exactly scale that well like that? The amount of data being transferred these days in MP shooters like Battlefield is staggering not to mention what it'll be like with BF3.
Click to expand...

If MAG on the PS3 (which I own and play once in a while) can do 256 players from over a year ago I'm sure DICE/EA can do it for our platform. I don't think it's as big a deal as you think. I'm not saying it's not a strain on servers but I know the server capacity and power exist to do it.
 
himmy said:
The limit with player count on consoles is lack of dedicated servers.
Click to expand...

True but either maps will be different for the PC and console versions or console plays will feel like it takes a micro age to get to where the action is. Or PC players will fee like they are playing in a box.

I'm happy as hell they are going back to the way things should have been in BC2 but I'm worried the maps will be either too large or too small.

Hopefully the map sizes will be tailored to the PC's increased player counts. Also PLEASE DICE PLEASE!! for the love of all that is holy ... don't require the usage of Gameservers .. they fucking BLOW compared to other dedicated services.
 
Is the teaser video loading for anybody? Definitely not loading for me :(

Edit: Nevermind. It doesn't seem to like Opera, but loads fine in Chrome.
 
Godmachine said:
True but either maps will be different for the PC and console versions or console plays will feel like it takes a micro age to get to where the action is. Or PC players will fee like they are playing in a box.

I'm happy as hell they are going back to the way things should have been in BC2 but I'm worried the maps will be either too large or too small.

Hopefully the map sizes will be tailored to the PC's increased player counts. Also PLEASE DICE PLEASE!! for the love of all that is holy ... don't require the usage of Gameservers .. they fucking BLOW compared to other dedicated services.
Click to expand...

No.

I play on 64 player servesr with 32 or less players all the time. Your conclusions are 100% incorrect.
 
himmy said:
No.

I play on 64 player servesr with 32 or less players all the time. Your conclusions are 100% incorrect.
Click to expand...

You do realize that while BF3 will be cross platform , BF2 was not. This will play into how BF3 will end up in many area's including map sizes.

Your 32 player maps in BF2 were DESIGNED to handle up to 64 players. How exactly will maps designed to work with 24 players hold up to 64 players?
 
That teaser was stunning. Can't wait to see more! This is going to be one hell of a game.
 
Godmachine said:
You do realize that while BF3 will be cross platform , BF2 was not. This will play into how BF3 will end up in many area's including map sizes.

Your 32 player maps in BF2 were DESIGNED to handle up to 64 players. How exactly will maps designed to work with 24 players hold up to 64 players?
Click to expand...

Well if they do what they did in BF2/2142 which is have the same map scale with playable area we will be fine. Say you take a map thats 10 miles square for 64 players you would then scale that same map down for 32 or 24 for the consoles giving them the same map with a smaller playabale area. Done.
 
please don't have punkbuster... it's a terrible anti cheat program..... and I hate that it runs in the background when the game isn't even running. I know it takes up little memory, but what if every damn game had their own bs programs running? And for it to be running all the time like it does, you would expect it to catch more hackers.....
 
Savoy said:
If MAG on the PS3 (which I own and play once in a while) can do 256 players from over a year ago I'm sure DICE/EA can do it for our platform. I don't think it's as big a deal as you think. I'm not saying it's not a strain on servers but I know the server capacity and power exist to do it.
Click to expand...

And at what point do you actually go 128v128 in MAG? I love MAG and also play it, not as much as I used to, but I never felt like it was 128v128 on Domination.

I only have on gripe at this point with BF3. Why Fall??? I was really hoping for late Spring or early Summer. Oh well, I guess all other 2011 great game will have to wait.

I also hope that servers can be configured to play infantry only from the get go.
 
Godmachine said:
You do realize that while BF3 will be cross platform , BF2 was not. This will play into how BF3 will end up in many area's including map sizes.

Your 32 player maps in BF2 were DESIGNED to handle up to 64 players. How exactly will maps designed to work with 24 players hold up to 64 players?
Click to expand...

I rememeber playing BF2 on my Xbox all the time. They might just do it the same way they did it before. Different maps, no jets and lower players etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top