Battlefield 3 - Official Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dethred said:
Then how was BC2 a console port? If the differences between the platforms are identical between the two games... then how is one a console port, and the other a PC-to-console port? Hell, I can see more console-inspired features than PC, so if anything this is definitely a console port.
Click to expand...

While bfbc2 isn't exactly a port (play one of the nba game ports where you can't even use your keyboard to know what I am talking about), it is called one because it uses the frostbite 1.5 engine that was developed first for consoles and contains relatively minor modifications. So it was developed for consoles and ported over to work on pcs (the engine), but the game itself isn't exactly a port.

Frostbite 2 is being developed with pc in mind in terms of taking advantage of directx 11 and 64 bit, and then adapted for the consoles. In other words, not a port.

Being similar in game play does not make a game a "console port."
 
I don't see how mechanics like a realistic magazine system define a game as being PC or console. Only simulation oriented games like the old Rainbow 6 games or SWAT 4 have a system like this.

I've always felt like when a lot people claim to want "PC gaming mechanics" what they really want are simulation mechanics.

The same goes with the complaint about the regen health system being bad due to realism. Again unless you are going down the simulation route, like Rainbow 6 or SWAT 4, that really shouldn't be a factor. Instantly healing from all wounds after taking multiple bullets from walking over a "health pack" isn't exactly the reality of battlefield medicine.

Just because a lot of FPS games are set in "realistic settings" does not remotely mean the games themselves are trying to be realistic simulators.The Battlefield series has never tried to go for a Rainbow 6 type feel.
 
Dethred said:
Health regen renders the medic class useless, as seen in BC2. It is a shitty gameplay mechanic (including bloody screen) which is way too reminiscent of COD. If anything they should have made you bleed out unless a medic intervened. Its another console kiddie way of getting around teamwork. Same with their planned vehicle partial health regen.

All of these dumb down the game for the console audience. Further proof that this game is being designed with consoles in mind, while throwing a few bones to the PCs to keep many of us from being disappointed.
Click to expand...

You literally have no idea what you're talking about. It takes forever to regen health in BC2, the medic is the easiest class to shit points with for a reason. You don't gain hundreds of points in a matter of 10 seconds after throwing down a medkit because everyone regens in 5 seconds flat. If you really feel so inclined you can hide in a corner for a minute+ straight and fully regen or you can find a medic and do it in 1/15th the amount of time. That's useless?

If they ever added bleeding out and other shit it would probably instantly kill any chance of purchase. BF is a fucking far cry from realism and it never should be about it. Heaven forbid my soldier that is more than capable of not only jumping roughly 6 feet high but also standing on top of a moving helicopter, or bailing out of a jet traveling roughly at the speed of sound and landing comfortably in the cockpit of another passing by, is capable of sprinting forever... It's a nice gameplay feature in case you get trapped 5 miles out, then you have another option besides killing yourself. It's just not fucking fun to nurse a sprint meter for 5 minutes straight as you run out of breath over and over and over because you got stranded away from the action. Is it really CONSOLIZED BLASPHEMY to imagine that it might be more fun to give someone a chance of getting there on foot instead of knowing that they're better off just sucking it up and rejoining the respawn queue?

Ammo was literally never scarce in BF unless you were parked 5 miles away from the action doing something amazing or stupid. There was no strategic usage when magazines existed. If you were near action you were 99% of the time near a source of ammo or dead. It changes nothing in reality. Oh God if it really comes down to it I might GASP have to pick up another kit!

Commo rose was more or less Q with the option to spam about ENEMY BOAT ENEMY BOAT ENEMY BOAT. You're delusional if you think it was a game changer.

I don't care about 3d spotting. Be sneakier in your flank. I worked the flank like it was my job, I constantly bypassed the mid section of maps to cut off the opposing team at their first point. 99% of the time, it was me using this in my favor rather than me getting fucked by it. Not my fault you can't play. I routinely made game shifting pushes with my squad. I'm apparently the sneakiest player to ever exist because I almost always managed to weasel my way out of camped spawns or completely across the map with little issue. I'm all for punishing the idiot who tries to go back to the same spot 6 times in a row and gets spotted every time.

4 player squads that are more powerful than their previous incarnations. I juggled squads to shift spawns in my favor. If another squad is closer and has an open spot, I'll tell my squad mates to wait a second as I spawn up and rejoin.

Mod tools can be expensive to deploy, it's probably middleware licensing among other things that prevents them from distributing stuff... and the fact that they have no plans to license the engine out at all. Epic, Valve, Crytek, etc are all in the business and it's free advertising to let people go hog wild on their engine. They probably eat the cost of whatever and chalk it up to exposure of their software. ANT is an EA middleware, it's meant for EA usage, DICE is likely in no position to go out and allow people to use it however they want for the sake of modding.
 
Last edited:
One thing I do hope they remove is 3D spotting, or completely revamp it, and other than that I'm fine with health regen as long as it takes a long ass time without a medic.
 
Damn dude, Halo 1 and Crysis 2 are console ports. BF3 is based around Frost Bite 2, which is solely a DX11 engine (with support for DX10). Since when did they have DX11 engines for console?

Let's make two completely different games, one for PC and one for console and name them the same thing! Voila! No console port!
 
I don't get how unlimited sprint is a bad thing. Getting around the huge BF2 maps on foot when there is no action around you in beyond painful. BF2's spring meter is also completely unrealistic - real soldiers can run with full gear on for more than five seconds, and they definitely do not need a 30-second break after every said 5-second run. It's not even a sprint either but more like an enthusiastic jog. I can see how unlimited jump could be a problem but putting a cooldown period on it would seem an easy fix.

The "spam Q to win" myth is just that. There is a cooldown on spotting if it is successful and an even longer cooldown when it isn't successful.

BFBC2's answer to the comma-rose worked because it was intuitive enough to work properly when aimed at specific things. There wasn't a default "need ammo/health" callout so you needed to have a line-of-sight to an assault to request ammo, a medic to request health, etc. Guess what? That means you have to be relatively close to teammates, which GASP encourages teamwork and discourages lone-wolfing!

Oh, and being able to carry and then throw four grenades in as many seconds in BF2 is beyond noob.
 
Valshistixol said:
One thing I do hope they remove is 3D spotting, or completely revamp it, and other than that I'm fine with health regen as long as it takes a long ass time without a medic.
Click to expand...

Don't want 3d spotting? Play on hardcore, just like in BC2.
 
I don't care about unlimited sprinting or jumping either. Same thing for the instant parachute.

I do hope they severely decrease accuracy while strafing and jumping, and reduce jumping while under fire. In terms of realism and gameplay, those are the two things that bug me.
 
OFaceSIG said:
Auto knifing? So you just walk up to someone and the just knifes the person and kills them for you?
Click to expand...

Auto as in the way BC2 does it, ie. as long as you're close enough, you just hit the knife button at you magically kill him. Contrary to BF2 whereby you not only had to pull the knife out, but actually aim and use it like any other weapon.
 
SUPERGT said:
Auto as in the way BC2 does it, ie. as long as you're close enough, you just hit the knife button at you magically kill him. Contrary to BF2 whereby you not only had to pull the knife out, but actually aim and use it like any other weapon.
Click to expand...

Was this confirmed for BF3 or are we still on BC2 bashing? Not that I dislike BC2 bashing and all lol
 
Volkum said:
Was this confirmed for BF3 or are we still on BC2 bashing? Not that I dislike BC2 bashing and all lol
Click to expand...

This is confirmed. Only this time in BF3, when you knife it's a lil animation, leaving yourself vulnerable too for a second. Oh yeah, it's only instakill from the back, from the front you're gonna have to shank em a few times.

When you toss a nade, you cannot prime it, once you hit the grenade key your character throws it immediately
 
I agree that some of the BC2 mechanics are more nooby than BF2, but honestly I don't think these things made a very big difference, the game was still a lot of fun. I was far more focused on things that were added, like destruction and the way that changed how people played the game rather than focusing on the stuff that was "taken away" such as prone etc.

Generally speaking these things aren't giving noobs any more of a winning chance vs good players, I agree that features that lower the skill ceiling are generally not good, I have to question if things like 3D spotting and auto knife are actually doing this. Good players can still use it to give themselves more of an advantage, and bad players are just as oblivious as normal. To someone who understands how spotting or the auto-knife works they have a new layer of tactics to consider.

I loved BF2 and I think it was a great game but I'm ready for some changes, I think an almost flat out remake would be a massive wasted opportunity, despite how good it was it did have it's flaws. I certainly think that destruction like in BC2 is part of a giant leap forwards in tactics and improvement in gaming in general and I'm happy to see a game that is essentially the best parts of both BC2 and BF2.
 
OFaceSIG said:
Auto knifing? So you just walk up to someone and the just knifes the person and kills them for you?
Click to expand...

No no no no. There is a "quick-knife" on the PC version, it does a lot less damage and takes more than one hit to kill someone. There is a knife you can equip just like CS or BF2 and if you sneak up behind someone you will do a one hit animated stealth kill. Supposedly this knife will not be in the console version.
 
devil22 said:
WTF does that shit have to do with being a port or not? Those could be gameplay decisions, based on what's fun (to everyone except jaded PC dinosaurs, which I thought I was one of until I saw you...)
Click to expand...

If the gameplay is adjusted to cater to thumb monkeys then the console is the lead platform. By your logic BC2 was not a console port??? You may want to think about what you're trying to say a bit longer.

It has dedicated servers, a high end DX11 engine, 64-players and looks fun. If BF2 is the be all end all of games for you, go play it till you drop, nobody's stopping you. What do you want that BF2 doesn't have, because as we all know, "gameplay trumps graphics" n all that jazz, so you should be perfectly happy sticking with BF2 forever.
Click to expand...

Maturity being thrown out the window again? Yes, that is the answer. Don't petition for actual positive change, just stick with the game for which the new one is SUPPOSED to be based. BC2 had dedicated servers, DX11, and a higher player limit on servers... so again by your logic BC2 was not a console port? How do you put this argument together?

I like not having things like non-regen health. It's retarded when you just want to have fun, to spend all your time searching for health packs n shit. Unlimited running and jumping, could care less, I mean how often is THAT an issue, you just make up shit to whine about. no commander, never cared for it in BF2 so I won't shed any tears.
Click to expand...

Go play Call of Duty. The whole point of health packs is to encourage teamplay, which you obvious couldn't give a shit less about. Unlimited running decreases the need to give a fuck about your situation. A wide open area? Shit, I'll just be a douche and run and bunny hop my way to safety without actually having to assess my situation. It further turns the game into a run and gun piece of shit. That is not what PC battlefield games are about.:rolleyes: Again, your logic is flawed.

Console port to me, means shit like non-dedicated servers, lame-o server browsers, inability to use all keys on a keyboard, bad graphics, etc. BF3 has (probably, judging by what we've seen and BC2) none of this. This is why PC gamers don't get good games, too many PC gamers want to go off on phony ass crusades over the little-ist issues instead of just enjoying a good game and being grateful for such high end graphics. Other developers see this and think we're childish, and not worth the effort, trust me.
Click to expand...

Obviously you have no clue what a console port is. DICE even said that BC2 was developed for consoles and ported over to PC... yet here you are saying the developer itself was wrong? AMAZING. If the entire gameplay is based on what works best for manchildren using a 6 button controller and no desire to have to think or use teamwork, THEN IT IS A CONSOLE PORT.

Alert the developers! All you have to do to calm down PC gamers is throw in a few minor features and they won't think its a console port!!:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
PrincessFrosty said:
I loved BF2 and I think it was a great game but I'm ready for some changes, I think an almost flat out remake would be a massive wasted opportunity, despite how good it was it did have it's flaws. I certainly think that destruction like in BC2 is part of a giant leap forwards in tactics and improvement in gaming in general and I'm happy to see a game that is essentially the best parts of both BC2 and BF2.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Krieger91 said:
No no no no. There is a "quick-knife" on the PC version, it does a lot less damage and takes more than one hit to kill someone. There is a knife you can equip just like CS or BF2 and if you sneak up behind someone you will do a one hit animated stealth kill. Supposedly this knife will not be in the console version.
Click to expand...

I don't know what mode of Bad Company 2 you're playing on PC but I haven't seen an equipable knife once...

there's only 1 knife, you press a key and it slashes out.
and it's generally 1 hit 1 kill unless you get stuck in a wall or something and it misses.
 
Dethred said:
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...

Clearly, any change that is different than BF2 can only be explained as consolification or dumbing down. Thus, the only LOGICAL conclusion that a MATURE person could come to is that the multiplayer, which isn't due out for months and hasn't been shown very much, is total trash. :rolleyes:
 
DisrupTer911 said:
I don't know what mode of Bad Company 2 you're playing on PC but I haven't seen an equipable knife once...

there's only 1 knife, you press a key and it slashes out.
and it's generally 1 hit 1 kill unless you get stuck in a wall or something and it misses.
Click to expand...

He's talking about BF3...
 
TwistedAegis said:
Clearly, any change that is different than BF2 can only be explained as consolification or dumbing down. Thus, the only LOGICAL conclusion that a MATURE person could come to is that the multiplayer, which isn't due out for months and hasn't been shown very much, is total trash. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No! Dammit! Are you serious? How on earth are you reasoning that? If they made a positive change that encouraged more teamwork, that would be a GOOD thing. For instance, instead of marking a vehicle with a tracer dart, a squad mate would have to laser designate a target for a jet to bomb. The entire BF3 forum wouldn't be up in arms over such a change, because it would enhance what the franchise has historically been about: Teamwork.

I'll give you two examples, out of a dozen or more, that detract from what makes Battlefield great:

4 person squads is a negative change, and there is no benefit from it. It is simply to cater to the consoles. It is taking a feature from BF2 and making it worse just to make the squad system work on 24p console version. There is no logical argument to the contrary.

Auto health regeneration is a feature which, until BF3, has only been instituted in the console based Bad Company games and console games like Halo and COD. It is a massive detriment to team play, and group play. Why stick with a group or a medic when you will auto heal? Shit, why even have medics in your squad if you can auto heal, albeit at a slower rate. It is a feature STRAIGHT FROM CALL OF DUTY, and its being put into this game because it allows console players to feel more "at home", and less burdened by teamwork (which they are not accustomed to at all).

Almost all of the scaling back from BF2 are on features which WERE NOT PROBLEMATIC IN ANY WAY. There is no other conclusion than to make the game friendly to console players. That doesn't necessary preclude DICE from simply making those features exclusive to the consoles, and making PC more "hardcore" (sad that standard gameplay from 6 years ago is now considered hardcore), but DICE doesn't want to put in the effort to differentiate the two platforms.
 
Last edited:
It's ironic that the person who's throwing around "console port" the most seems to be the only one that doesn't seem to have a concept of what it actually means.
 
RamonGTP said:
It's ironic that the person who's throwing around "console port" the most seems to be the only one that doesn't seem to have a concept of what it actually means.
Click to expand...

I'd appreciate a list of 5 things that are different between the console version and PC version in BF3 that weren't differences between the two platforms in BC2. Why does that matter? Because BC2 was a console port as per the developer themselves, and if there are no new differences between the two platforms in BC2 and BF3, then how can you assert that this is PC based? In other words, if DICE hadn't claimed this was PC-lead, then what would you argue makes this a true PC game?

5 things or you can apply your own allegation to yourself. Thanks.
 
How does a 4 person squad, when applied to a team of 32 people and a server of 64 people, cater to consoles? It is a design choice.

Auto health regeneration isn't something you HAVE to have on a console. It is just as easy to run up to a health pack on a console as it is on a PC. The auto health regeneration is also extremely, extremely slow compared to a health pack. Again, a design choice.

Everything you are bitching about are design choices, not fundamental handicapping of the game due to limitations of console hardware and/or controllers. What I'm saying is, if the consoles and PC were 100% equal right now in both graphics ability and controls, it is likely many of these changes would still be being made.

And on top of it, you have what may be perhaps the absolute best graphics in a FPS/MP FPS game, ever. Just because a design feature is also in console games or COD doesn't make it inherently bad.
 
Dethred said:
If the gameplay is adjusted to cater to thumb monkeys then the console is the lead platform. By your logic BC2 was not a console port??? You may want to think about what you're trying to say a bit longer.
Click to expand...

There are degrees of 'console portness' and I don't think BC2 was that bad, but BF3 has so much more than BC2 that you are trying to force yourself to not see in order to make your silly argument on the internet.

Maturity being thrown out the window again? Yes, that is the answer. Don't petition for actual positive change, just stick with the game for which the new one is SUPPOSED to be based. BC2 had dedicated servers, DX11, and a higher player limit on servers... so again by your logic BC2 was not a console port? How do you put this argument together?
Click to expand...

This is the stupidest argument. BC2 had more players on PC than consoles, and it had DX11, but it did NOT have OVER TWICE THE FRIGGIN PLAYERS and a HIGH END DX11 engine that looks almost photorealistic on the PC. That how I 'put this argument together'. sheesh.


Go play Call of Duty. The whole point of health packs is to encourage teamplay, which you obvious couldn't give a shit less about. Unlimited running decreases the need to give a fuck about your situation. A wide open area? Shit, I'll just be a douche and run and bunny hop my way to safety without actually having to assess my situation. It further turns the game into a run and gun piece of shit. That is not what PC battlefield games are about.:rolleyes: Again, your logic is flawed.
Click to expand...

Too much teamwork can be a bad thing, sometimes. I don't want my teammates to have to aim my riflle for me, nor do I want to hunt down teammates that may not be around to get health back, especially on huge maps where they could be on the other side and perhaps even nobody is playing that class. You get in a firefight, you lose some health, but kill the other person, then you just sit with minimum health until someone spits on you? Dumbest gameplay mechanic ever. Bunny hopping, you really are exaggerating to make your point, I've never seen ANYONE in BC2 in 292 hours of gameplay, bunny hop their way out of a jam. Ever. But you keep on screaming the sky is falling, like I said, why don't you just play BF2 and quit whining.


Obviously you have no clue what a console port is. DICE even said that BC2 was developed for consoles and ported over to PC... yet here you are saying the developer itself was wrong? AMAZING. If the entire gameplay is based on what works best for manchildren using a 6 button controller and no desire to have to think or use teamwork, THEN IT IS A CONSOLE PORT.

Alert the developers! All you have to do to calm down PC gamers is throw in a few minor features and they won't think its a console port!!:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

If you trust DICE so much about BC2 being a console port, why don't you trust them about BF3 NOT being a console port? That would certainly end the internets lamest argument ever pretty quickly. I'm not saying DICE is wrong, but the degree of console portness of BF3 is so low that it's neglible. And I'm fine with everything that's in BF3, what I would not be fine with is DX9 graphics because it made porting easier, or no dedicated servers, THAT'S what a console port would be in my eyes, BF3 isn't even close. You take the term too literally, if someone makes an awesome game with everything a PC game should have for consoles and PCs, that's not really what someone would refer to as a console port, console port is trash like MW3, which uses DX9 on some old trashy quake 3 modded engine and looks like total ass and plays on non-dedicated servers, not literally any game that can play on consoles and PCs. Don't be obtuse.


Your definition of 'minor feature' is quite hilarious. The graphics in BF3 are simply the best I've seen, how can you claim THAT'S a console port. It would seem there are no PC games then, because if 'console port trash' has the best graphics by a mile, then what's even the difference. Also, console port implies that it was written for consoles first, then converted to PCs later (as some game devs are known to do), BF3 was not that. Basically only the dev knows for sure what platform it was written for first, but if they say PC I believe them, especially after watching their graphics/DX11 videos that show how much their engine does and how it works. But what's really the difference? You could make a game for consoles, port it to the PC and end up with the same game as one that was written for PCs then ported to consoles. You are getting hysterical over a 12 year old's insult that usually implies very poorly made games, that is usually not used seriously by adults, BF3 looks like the LAST game that should ever be called a 'console port'.

I think what DICE has done is to modify the games so that they can ship the same game on all platforms, and to me these are just not major features, although I can see how someone would get their panties in a bunch over commrose and medkits and 4 man instead of 6 man squads. :rolleyes: This helps DICE make money on more sales which is a good thing, in totality when you consider all that BF3 is bringing to the table. As it insures a long line of BF games that, in my mind at least, have a very decent PC feature set.

You act like a spoiled little kid that's going to take his ball (PC) and go home. Nobody seems to agree with you here, despite your generous spamming of this thread, DICE doesn't agree with you, nobody in general on the internet agrees with you, you can either try to somehow manage to live life with 4-man squads and no commrose :)rolleyes: again) or not play BF3, but I don't have any sympathy for someone who wastes hours trashing what looks like the best game ever imo because of trivial shit.
 
Last edited:
Dethred said:
I'd appreciate a list of 5 things that are different between the console version and PC version in BF3 that weren't differences between the two platforms in BC2. Why does that matter? Because BC2 was a console port as per the developer themselves, and if there are no new differences between the two platforms in BC2 and BF3, then how can you assert that this is PC based? In other words, if DICE hadn't claimed this was PC-lead, then what would you argue makes this a true PC game?

5 things or you can apply your own allegation to yourself. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Like I said, you don't know a port is. 5 "different" things doesn't define a port. Thanks for proving my point. I as well as others have told you several times that both games are called BF3, so they're going to be similar. And we've also told you that the differences that do exist are exactly what sets the PC version apart.

Just because it isn't BF2 with better graphics (which is clearly what you're after) doesn't make it a port, and certainly doesn't make it a bad game. Why not just go play BF2 and free this thread from ignorant nonsense?
 
RamonGTP said:
Like I said, you don't know a port is. 5 "different" things doesn't define a port. Thanks for proving my point. I as well as others have told you several times that both games are called BF3, so they're going to be similar. And we've also told you that the differences that do exist are exactly what sets the PC version apart.

Just because it isn't BF2 with better graphics (which is clearly what you're after) doesn't make it a port, and certainly doesn't make it a bad game. Why not just go play BF2 and free this thread from ignorant nonsense?
Click to expand...

Ok, so you couldn't name one thing? That's all I needed to know. BC2 was described as a console port from the developer itself. If they call it a console port and the only differences between the PC and console were the graphics, player limit, server browser (I think), then I need something more than that to believe that the new game isn't also a console port.

Let me diagram it since you probably still aren't getting it:

Bad Company 2 = Console Port
-Consoles and PC had only 2 or 3 subtle differences

Battlefield 3 = X
-Consoles and PC have the SAME 2 or 3 subtle differences

What does X equal? Oh wait, the developer said PC is lead platform this time so despite REALITY, its actually a PC-lead game. Brilliant.

You call my posts ignorant non-sense in the most ironic way possible. But yet again, thanks for putting words into my mouth. I'll state it again until it enters your brain: I, and literally thousands of others, want BF3 to be a general improvement after 6 years of waiting. We don't want it to be an improvement on BC2, we want it to be an improvement on the game for which it is named. Is that so difficult to understand?
 
Last edited:
devil22 said:
You act like a spoiled little kid that's going to take his ball (PC) and go home. Nobody seems to agree with you here, despite your generous spamming of this thread, DICE doesn't agree with you, nobody in general on the internet agrees with you, you can either try to somehow manage to life live with 4-man squads and no commrose :)rolleyes: again) or not play BF3, but I don't have any sympathy for someone who wastes hours trashing what looks like the best game ever imo because of trivial shit.
Click to expand...

Classic mature post on Hardforum, you make this place great.

I am not going to re-address all the hogwash you posted, nor am I going to read it. Ironically, just about every thread on the ACTUAL Battlefield forums concerns the shafting of the PC community. I suppose that's the problem really, people with no real concern for the game as a sequel to BF2 are in this thread making quite frankly terrible posts. I suppose this mentality is also why the dumbing down of PC gaming is becoming more accepted.

Yes, my completely valid critiques (probably more so than yours and many in this thread simply based on my experience with the franchise), are trivial and pointless. By your logic (as ADMITTED BY DICE ITSELF), there would be no prone in BF3, nor battlerecorder, nor squad leaders. But I guess "we listened to the community and included..." means that the community has no say. Right? Up is down and BF3 is a real successor to BF2.

Approaching 800 people on the EA UK forum agree on commo-rose, something which is relatively minor in most people's eyes: http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/...er-dice-commo-rose-game-defining-feature.html

I bet those 100 or so people who voted against it never played the original BF games to begin with... but I'm the one spamming this thread with non-sense.

Oh wait, here's another poll on blowing your assertion that I am the only one who cares about the 4-man squad. http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3-pc/1404736-petition-6-man-squads.html

The ratio is literally 10:1 against 4-player squads in all game modes. But I'm sure evidence won't change your mind.
 
Last edited:
Raudulfr said:
And 80% of them only want it so they can troll 24/7 spamming "Enemy boat spotted".
Click to expand...

LOL. Most servers blocked players, for up to a minute, that made more than 3-4 consecutive spottings. If you played on a properly admin'ed server that was never a problem.
 
DisrupTer911 said:
I don't know what mode of Bad Company 2 you're playing on PC but I haven't seen an equipable knife once...

there's only 1 knife, you press a key and it slashes out.
and it's generally 1 hit 1 kill unless you get stuck in a wall or something and it misses.
Click to expand...

When did I mention BC2?
 
Dethred said:
Ok, so you couldn't name one thing? That's all I needed to know.
Click to expand...

You apparently also need to know what a console port is. Where are these thousands of people? Are they in hiding and you their leader? Here's a BF3 thread on one of the busiest PC forums on the net and most people are telling you you're wrong.
 
RamonGTP said:
You apparently also need to know what a console port is. Where are these thousands of people? Are they in hiding and you their leader? Here's a BF3 thread on one of the busiest PC forums on the net and most people are telling you you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Seriously, you need to start reading. Look up a few posts and you'll see a link to a poll for commo rose with almost 1000 votes, or the 6 player squad petition that has a 10:1 pro-6-man-squad bias. Believe it or not, there is an actual official Battlefield 3 forum, and in that forum there are over 40,000 posts just in the PC specific section. I will tell you, that this busy PC forum and its BF3 thread would be overwhelmed by the sheer number of people that agree with me.

google.com can lead you to the official BF3 forum. I'd suggest the EA UK forum since it is more popular and the DICE community managers visit and post often.

And I also am not surprised that my diagram didn't work out for you. I am guessing you still think BC2 isn't a console port even though the developers said it is one. If so, you remind me of the people who still believe there were WMD in Iraq, despite the previous administration admitted there weren't. Everyone has to cling onto some kind of delusion I suppose.
 
Last edited:
And you remind me of both a crying baby and a stubborn old thick headed man that's so dense basic common sense eludes him. Such as health regen equating to console port. Give me a break. Do us all a favor then and go to the other forms where people apparently agree with you. Clearly this isn't one of them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top