Battlefield 3?

H

HondaCop

Limp Gawd
Joined
Feb 12, 2008
Messages
239
Seeing that Battlefield 2 has been out for 4 years now, I wonder if EA has a Battlefield 3 in mind for the PC? Just imagine a Battlefield 3 which sports Battlefield's 2 gameplay on a Crysis engine? That would be outstanding!
 
BF2 has been out for 3 years, not 4, but I am sure they are working on something for PC besides Battlefield Heroes. I would love to see a BF3 sometime next year.
 
I think it was confirmed that they are working on more future battlefield games than they have explicitly announced. I sure hope Battlefield 3 as a PC game is on its way though.
 
They have confirmed that they are working on a few unannounced Battlefield titles. There was at least one title that could be for PC. But there has never been any kind of official acknowledgement that a Battlefield 3 is in development--nor have they confirmed that any BF game will come to PC other than Battlefield: Heroes.
 
Its interesting that they didn't put out a PC version of Bad Company. Its a fantastic game.

It'd be great if they put it out on PC, added KBM support to the PS3 version with an match making option to enter KBM only games. Then implement cross platform play.
 
chameleoneel said:
Its interesting that they didn't put out a PC version of Bad Company. Its a fantastic game.

It'd be great if they put it out on PC, added KBM support to the PS3 version with an match making option to enter KBM only games. Then implement cross platform play.
Click to expand...

They tend to keep the BF series either PC or Console not both. Bad Company was for consoles as BF2 and 2142 was for PC's. They have confirmed they are working on a new patch (with new content) for BF2 and should be out this year sometime. As for a BF3 its been rumored but nothing official. Im sure there is some type of BF3 in the works but other than that, who knows.

BF2 is still a very huge clan game and they would need to put out one hell of a game to get BF2 people to switch. We saw this when 2142 came out. Even though it was played must people ended up switching back to BF2.
 
chameleoneel said:
Its interesting that they didn't put out a PC version of Bad Company. Its a fantastic game.

It'd be great if they put it out on PC, added KBM support to the PS3 version with an match making option to enter KBM only games. Then implement cross platform play.
Click to expand...
BF:BC would like a joke compared to BF2 if they ever ported to the PC. BF2 is far superior in terms of what you can do etc. The only thing BF:BC does better is physics and the destructible buildings, that's it. There is no way BC could be a hit on PC.

It is an awesome game for consoles, however.
 
I stopped playing BF2 about 2 years ago, it got boring fast. BF3 is much needed for the PC. Battlefield Heroes doesn't count as it looks wank!
 
ComputerBox34 said:
BF:BC would like a joke compared to BF2 if they ever ported to the PC. BF2 is far superior in terms of what you can do etc. The only thing BF:BC does better is physics and the destructible buildings, that's it. There is no way BC could be a hit on PC.

It is an awesome game for consoles, however.
Click to expand...


Besides the whole destruction thing (which is a huge gameplay addition btw) the only major differences are less max players due to ram limitations and much less air presence. And really, for the gold rush mode I don't want more players.

I'm just very happy with BC because it feels much more polished and shipped in a better state than BF2, which took 5 or so patches before several pretty big issues were completely worked out and we had a real game on our hands. I still played and loved the shit out of it though even in that early time. Just goes to show how fun these games are at their core.
 
Lazy_Moron said:
They tend to keep the BF series either PC or Console not both. Bad Company was for consoles as BF2 and 2142 was for PC's. They have confirmed they are working on a new patch (with new content) for BF2 and should be out this year sometime.
Click to expand...

Gawd please include widescreen support!
 
Blackstone said:
They have confirmed that they are working on a few unannounced Battlefield titles. There was at least one title that could be for PC. But there has never been any kind of official acknowledgement that a Battlefield 3 is in development--nor have they confirmed that any BF game will come to PC other than Battlefield: Heroes.
Click to expand...


Agreed. I've heard rumors that there might be an announcement for a new Battlefield game for PC after Heroes is released. I can't remember where I read that but it seems to be sticking in my mind for some reason. Either way, I'm hoping that the 1.5 patch for BF2 will hold us over until the next installment. And I agree with Lazy_Moron, BF3 (or whatever the next BF game will be) will have to be a pretty killer game to get people to switch from BF2. BF2 is still very popular and I really don't see that population going to a new game anytime soon (unless it's BF3 and a clear continuation of the series, unlike 2142).
 
chameleoneel said:
Besides the whole destruction thing (which is a huge gameplay addition btw) the only major differences are less max players due to ram limitations and much less air presence. And really, for the gold rush mode I don't want more players.

I'm just very happy with BC because it feels much more polished and shipped in a better state than BF2, which took 5 or so patches before several pretty big issues were completely worked out and we had a real game on our hands. I still played and loved the shit out of it though even in that early time. Just goes to show how fun these games are at their core.
Click to expand...

comms dont work. cant do private lobbies, no commander. squad invite is broken has fuck and u cant create ur own squad and become a squad leader and tell people where to go and waht to do.

bc is a cut down version of bf bc. destructable enviornment saved bf bc from becoming yet another average shitty game. i got bf bc and im bored of it already and have nto reached level 25 on it yet
 
I don't think there are enough players to need a commander in Gold Rush. also, the objective is alot more straight forward. Its not like conquest where there are split objectives at any given moment.

The matchmaking is definitely crap. Its really inexcuseable that so many games are still shipping with crud matchmaking since Halo 2 released like 5 years ago.
 
BF2 is an amazing game. It would be extremely difficult to make a BF3 good enough to pull BF2 players to it. I think that's why BF3 has taken so long, and why there will still be a substantial wait for it. I'm honestly always surprised when i see people put down BF2. I think 99% of the enjoyment of the game starts with the people you are playing with, and the server you are playing on. I just can't imagine having been exposed to a really awesome BF2 experience, and not getting hooked. So in that way, i think it's sad how many gamers have probably missed out. Either because they just never experienced the game for everything it should be (squads working and communicating together, commanders commanding, well balanced teams, and a well admin'ed server,) or they just don't have the personality that allows them a real solid ass kicking every once in a while.
 
Since the 1.5 patch for BF2 has been announced, but is still at large... I'm hoping they have not forgotten their PC market. I have to agree with Lazy_Moron concerning Dice segregating their PC and console titles. It initially irked me that Bad Company was not coming to PC, but after playing numerous other console to PC ports that just fell on their face due to the transfer... I've come to respect the decision.

So far they have been pretty tight-lipped about BF3, but I think enough has been leaked that we can be relatively confident it will come. With many of today's game sporting destructable environments and other "next gen" features, I'm just hoping they are taking their time in order to build a truly fun game. BF2 will live on my HDD's until that happens.
 
pigpen said:
BF2 is an amazing game. It would be extremely difficult to make a BF3 good enough to pull BF2 players to it. I think that's why BF3 has taken so long, and why there will still be a substantial wait for it. I'm honestly always surprised when i see people put down BF2. I think 99% of the enjoyment of the game starts with the people you are playing with, and the server you are playing on. I just can't imagine having been exposed to a really awesome BF2 experience, and not getting hooked. So in that way, i think it's sad how many gamers have probably missed out. Either because they just never experienced the game for everything it should be (squads working and communicating together, commanders commanding, well balanced teams, and a well admin'ed server,) or they just don't have the personality that allows them a real solid ass kicking every once in a while.
Click to expand...

You are right about BF2 being an amazing game. I have never played a FPS so much as I did this game, and it still doesn't get boring; there is so much you can do, and if you find a good server, it's a blast.
 
I don't think technology's progressed enough to warrant a BF3. A true successor to BF2 would need complete terrain deformation, physics, 200 player servers, huge ass maps, etc to offer better gameplay than BF2.
 
Eagle156 said:
I don't think technology's progressed enough to warrant a BF3. A true successor to BF2 would need complete terrain deformation, physics, 200 player servers, huge ass maps, etc to offer better gameplay than BF2.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that today's technology is not better than the technology of 3 years ago?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top