Battlefield 3 - Official Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
rampantandroid said:
Need I remind you that regardless of one's flying abilities in game...there were at most 2 jets per side normally...and repsawn rates were slower. So if someone got in and crashed right away...no jet for the team. And let's not forget that 10 people camped for the jet. Forget that their team was busy losing 4 flags all at once. They wanted the damn jet. And if they didn't get the jet themselves, they'd rage.

No. To hell with that. Goodbye jets.




And that's what happened. Someone got the jet and crashed, and an F-18 decides to rain on your friggen parade. Forget the two stingers you just shot at it. Forget the jet respawning, the F-18 pilot knows the respawn times, circles and destroys it as it respawns. It was overpowered. Moreover, it wasn't idiot proof. And in an online game, you have to account for that. No game should be decided by one person like that.
Click to expand...

Agree 100% with this. I could fly no problem and still preferred maps without Jets.
 
I hated flying, and some of the ace pilots racking up 60-0 KDRs on a regular basis.

I think most of those problems could be solved by actually having working AA guns/SAM rockets, and actually instituting a system which forces players to enter a queue for a jet. That way if you enter into the tower, or hangar and enter the queue, you can estimate the length of time it will take to get a jet. I think that would eliminate the teamkilling and general clusterfuck on the runways and launchpads while still allowing for jets and other vehicles.
 
Dethred said:
I think most of those problems could be solved by actually having working AA guns/SAM rockets, and actually instituting a system which forces players to enter a queue for a jet. That way if you enter into the tower, or hangar and enter the queue, you can estimate the length of time it will take to get a jet. I think that would eliminate the teamkilling and general clusterfuck on the runways and launchpads while still allowing for jets and other vehicles.
Click to expand...

I think that is a good idea. Didn't Crysis Wars do something like that? You walked into a garage and the door closed then opened with you in the vehicle?
 
Dethred said:
I hated flying, and some of the ace pilots racking up 60-0 KDRs on a regular basis.

I think most of those problems could be solved by actually having working AA guns/SAM rockets, and actually instituting a system which forces players to enter a queue for a jet. That way if you enter into the tower, or hangar and enter the queue, you can estimate the length of time it will take to get a jet. I think that would eliminate the teamkilling and general clusterfuck on the runways and launchpads while still allowing for jets and other vehicles.
Click to expand...

Yea the AA guns in 1942 were boss
 
bf2 was some good times.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY3BgZDXsz0"]YouTube - ‪Tearing it Up‬‏[/ame]

But 1942 was better for flying.

The airplanes just fit the small maps of the BF series better than jets did. hopefully we will see map size increase in bf3 for the jets so they have more area to roam.

"when i say small maps i mean compared to the size of more flight oriented games, by comparison all the bf series maps are small and too confined when you bring super sonic jets into the mix."
 
TwistedAegis said:
I think that is a good idea. Didn't Crysis Wars do something like that? You walked into a garage and the door closed then opened with you in the vehicle?
Click to expand...

Nope. Crysis Wars had a currency system. You'd go into the factory, buy the vehicle, the door would close while it was produced, and then only you could unlock the vehicle when the door opened. If you were inside the garage when the door closed, you'd usually die.
 
Dethred said:
I hated flying, and some of the ace pilots racking up 60-0 KDRs on a regular basis.

I think most of those problems could be solved by actually having working AA guns/SAM rockets, and actually instituting a system which forces players to enter a queue for a jet. That way if you enter into the tower, or hangar and enter the queue, you can estimate the length of time it will take to get a jet. I think that would eliminate the teamkilling and general clusterfuck on the runways and launchpads while still allowing for jets and other vehicles.
Click to expand...

Has this even remotely been addressed by DICE yet? I can't tell you how frustrating it was to wait in line for the attack chopper only to have some jerkoff cut ahead everyone else when it respawns and fly off.
 
jonneymendoza said:
Are we still whining in this thread lol?

my two pence is that this game has a balance between having a few console/dumbed down features whilst having a lot of depth/pc centric stuff going on too.

Its going to be a fantastic game. if you dont ike what you see so far, dont buy it.
Click to expand...

Good sir, I have just this to say to you... I concur :).
 
What I always hated about jets in the BF games was the lack of throttle control, would be great if they actually implemented.
 
Dethred said:
This is the problem I think some of you don't quite realize. BF2 was a pure PC game. It, to this day, signifies how much deeper and better a PC game can be over its console rivals. Some of us have been waiting for a successor to come along for 6 years!

Here we are, 6 years later, and that successor is going to be a stripped down consolized piece of shit. Is the game going to be fun? Most likely for a while. Is it going to be as fun as a true PC successor to BF2 and 2142? No way in hell.

What this signifies to many (thousands) of us Battlefield PC enthusiasts is the death of the brand. There will be no proper BF3 because this hybrid bastard is taking its place. I personally considered BF to be the last bastion of hope for true PC FPS games... and its going to be a console port yet again. And to rub salt into the wound, DICE is going to keep harping on the lie that this is being developed for PC and trimmed down for consoles. We're not stupid.
Click to expand...


Although this will not be a console port by the very definition of what we here at [H] consider a console port to be, I agree with this statement.

It may be optimized/developed primarily for PC, but it will never be what BF1942,BF:V, BF2, and BF2142 were and always will be in the hearts of its fans. The COD console craze really stole the glory from PC gaming. It has been said countless times, but money really does talk. For all the BF fans 2142 and prior, think about this: Why on Earth are people comparing COD to BF? (Being an FPS is obvious) But why are these games even being mentioned in the same sentence? DICE should have left BF (excluding spin-offs) on the PC. Nothing could ever reach BF's magnitude. The only way this could happen, is if DICE brought the game down to the needs/wants of it competitor's console gamers...well what do ya know?

In all reality, time will tell. Fall is almost here.
 
bart1975 said:
An up to date remake of BF1942 would be awesome.
Click to expand...
It's called Battlefield 1943. Only partially joking. Seriously though, they wouldn't do it without screwing something up to 'make it better', aka, make it easier for modern gamers.
 
RX3 said:
Why on Earth are people comparing COD to BF? (Being an FPS is obvious) But why are these games even being mentioned in the same sentence? DICE should have left BF (excluding spin-offs) on the PC. Nothing could ever reach BF's magnitude. The only way this could happen, is if DICE brought the game down to the needs/wants of it competitor's console gamers...well what do ya know?
Click to expand...

COD currently is the most recognized and biggest FPS game and series, so any fps will tend to draw comparisons. Just like how online FPS were previously compared to CS (this is actually still shared with COD on the PC), and before that to Quake. Just like how RTS games tend to be compared to Starcraft, MMOs to WoW, action RPGs to Diablo and etc.
 
We know this. They are first person shooters, COD is the biggest. I get it...I stated that.

In the context of comparing gameplay to gameplay however, these two games are vastly different. True fans of the Battlefield franchise do not want to see this game get belittled or bastardized. The game has transformed to cater to a new audience. This is exactly what the fans did not want. I'm all for having separate spin-offs. BC2 was great on consoles. But you have to admit, the PC version is a console port not in the general sense of development priority, but in the design and gameplay choices.
 
My point with that was the games will be compared regardless of the actual direction due to the superficial similarities and the popularity of COD. Because of this I don't feel you can say that BF3 is going the wrong direction by copying COD due to all the comparisons, it will be compared regardless. I'm sure once people get the games, they will find ample similarities, but this is unavoidable to a large extent. But there will also be a lot of differences as well.
 
I am trying to hard not to think about BF3, this is going to suck up so much of my time it's not even funny.
 
bigdogchris said:
It's called Battlefield 1943. Only partially joking. Seriously though, they wouldn't do it without screwing something up to 'make it better', aka, make it easier for modern gamers.
Click to expand...

From the Battlefield 1943 webpage:
Battlefield 1943 will be available on Xbox LIVE® Arcade, PlayStation® Network for download this summer and on PC later this fall.
 
Ugh.
In Battlefield 1943 you have unlimited ammo and regenerating health. When ammo runs out, it has a replenish timer that will regenerate ammo and health regenerates when you aren’t taking damage.

What a bunch of shit. Give me 1942 + updated graphics and no other changes.
 
OH FOR FUCK SAKES.

BF3 UK release date is the 28th I've just found out on their site.

What do we have do to fix this stupidity?!

UGH, I'm so mad right now :mad:
 
PrincessFrosty said:
OH FOR FUCK SAKES.

BF3 UK release date is the 28th I've just found out on their site.

What do we have do to fix this stupidity?!

UGH, I'm so mad right now :mad:
Click to expand...

But don't you get it for cheaper? I joke, I joke...the Uk prices for everything are rediculous to me too (i'm currently having to pay :()

Didn't movie studios of all people work out that releasing the film at the same time globally was a way of cutting down of piracy. I don't see what advantage it is to them to release it later. Do people in the US hate it when the rest of the world gets the game at the same time, and not feel special or something so not buy it...? (on a multiplayer title too, i'm sure having more players is a bonus...) I know europe is the smallest of the main 3 markets for games, so other than not buying it (which will mean less games get released in europe than currently are), or complaining (which they will probably ignore like the damned dead space save issue) theres not much which can be done :(

Can you import a US copy (or get one from a US download site)? (for cheaper :D)
 
DeathPrincess said:
But don't you get it for cheaper? I joke, I joke...the Uk prices for everything are rediculous to me too (i'm currently having to pay :()

Didn't movie studios of all people work out that releasing the film at the same time globally was a way of cutting down of piracy. I don't see what advantage it is to them to release it later. Do people in the US hate it when the rest of the world gets the game at the same time, and not feel special or something so not buy it...? (on a multiplayer title too, i'm sure having more players is a bonus...) I know europe is the smallest of the main 3 markets for games, so other than not buying it (which will mean less games get released in europe than currently are), or complaining (which they will probably ignore like the damned dead space save issue) theres not much which can be done :(

Can you import a US copy (or get one from a US download site)? (for cheaper :D)
Click to expand...
I COULD see them wanting to stagger to see how their servers handle the load but I think if that were the case they'd start in the smallest market instead of the largest....eh...I'll enjoy it regardless lol.
 
Dethred said:
Why are the changes only removing features and making the game more console friendly? No one is saying they should remake BF2, but just not remove key gameplay features and noobify the shit out of it. (I don't expect 95% of the people in this thread to understand that). Why not fix the issues and then add improvements?

There was no major outcry or issues with what they removed, its simply that they are trying to make both platforms as similar as possible in the interest of time and money. They can't add in complex things like commanders, or a commo rose, because its hard to implement with 6 buttons and an audience that is 12 years old or stupid as shit.

The things they have changed are not for "better gameplay" are many of you are dismissing or explaining it as, its to cater to people who are accustomed to COD. Some of you may think that is all right, but I am betting those of you who considered Battlefield their favorite FPS series will agree with me.
Click to expand...

Bingo. I could not agree with you more. I played the hell out of 1942 and BF2 and I'm just disappointed with the way this has headed to be honest. DICE has most certainly sold out to the consoles despite what they've said. They have lied to PC gamers flat out before so I have absolutely no reason to trust them now. I'm sure folks will love this game and thats great, but this game is Bad Company 3. They are catering to console players.
 
Valshistixol said:
Anyone else pissed you can't play Valve games without Steam?
Click to expand...

Nope. Been a member of Steam since Sept 2003. Also, Valve games are fewer than other companies, and considering how awesome they all are, I'll glady play them on Steam. Also, Steam has pretty much single-handedly kept the PC gaming market alive.

Also, Steam is owned and created by Valve.
 
Valshistixol said:
Anyone else pissed you can't play Valve games without Steam?
Click to expand...

I think these guys intentionally missed your point. :rolleyes:

I don't have a problem with Origin. In fact it's a got a decent UI and I bought 1 game on it on sale last week and it was as painless as steam. Not a big deal and the sky is not falling.
 
I've only seen a couple of Valshistixol's posts but from what I've seen so far he makes it quite a point to bash Valve. I have to say, his posts are quite similar to a certain well known Valve anti-fanboy around here. :p
 
Crash250f said:
I've only seen a couple of Valshistixol's posts but from what I've seen so far he makes it quite a point to bash Valve. I have to say, his posts are quite similar to a certain well known Valve anti-fanboy around here. :p
Click to expand...

Actually I really enjoy Valve's games (pre L4D) and I have 137 games on Steam. I am just attempting to draw a parallel to what people on this forum are having such a good time bitching about. People praise Valve for one thing and lambaste EA for the exact same thing.
 
We all know it's not OK to say negative things about Valve, seeing as they are perfect and flawless GODS and the saviours of mankind, you know?


While EA is obviously the DEVIL and must be destroyed at all costs by the legions of Valve fanboys, er, the legions of "good".



Heaven forbid EA should actually try to make money by making their games exclusive on Origin, because you can totally buy Valve games from other digital stores right? Oh wait.
Go go team double standards!


No matter, I get a kick out of all the Valve fanboy raging and all, so it's all good :)
 
While I personally don't care, I can from one angle or another understand why the frustration exists over EA choosing to make their game only available through their own service.

First, people like choice...especially in our society. We've been given the freedom of choice and when its taken away, even if its not really a big deal, we speak out about it...of course the internet makes that mild restriction seem like socialism taking over America...

Second, its like the inconvience of having to run a dual boot OS. Everyone has the ability to do this really, but having to restart your system so you can go into the new environment sucks...but like i said...much smaller scale.

Third, we are also a society that likes to have all our crap in a single easy to access point, look to all our high tech toys for proof of that.

Finally, I dont really give a shit as long as, like i said earlier in the thread, the program doesnt suck up resources, isnt a bitch to navigate, and doesnt have some shady shit going on in the background.
 
USMCGrunt said:
Finally, I dont really give a shit as long as, like i said earlier in the thread, the program doesnt suck up resources, isnt a bitch to navigate, and doesnt have some shady shit going on in the background.
Click to expand...

Well, considering you don't need Origin running in the background to play, I can only assume half of those people aren't very bright or are just trolls. I don't see anyone bitching about D2D, GoG, Impulse, or whatever's download manager! Origin is just that, a downloader and not much more.
 
Let's put it this way.

I own 185 games on steam and use it daily, I own nothing on Origin and don't even have it installed.

Which platform do you think I'd prefer to buy BF3 on, if I had the choice?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top