View Full Version : Battlefield 3
BreakABone
10-02-2011, 04:30 PM
The "beta" went public late last week, and I'm sure some of you have gotten your hands on it. Curious your impressions.
From my time with the game (only on the 360, not sure if should download PS3 version), the game just doesn't really feel like anything special. I can kind of gloss over some of the technical glitches because I do expect them to be sorted, but I've had audio shorting, screen discoloration and random flickering in my encounter.
So thoughts/impressions?
Angrist
10-02-2011, 04:52 PM
Isn't that was a beta is for?
gekko
10-02-2011, 05:14 PM
I completely agree with you, I don't see what the hype is about for this series.
I recently picked up BFBC2 for the campaign, and I was very unimpressed. It felt very unpolished, with so many little things done wrong. AI teammates were on their own program, overuse of smoke effects made it very difficult to drive some sections and made it impossible to see the enemy who obviously isn't affected by the same smoke, story was fairly uninteresting and lacked any real exciting moments. It really felt old, like the way the original COD and Medal of Honor series played, but really wasn't a memorable experience in today's market.
I've only tried Battlefield 3 beta a couple times, and it feels like the same game to me. I've yet to enjoy a multiplayer match, and while people are raving about the teamwork aspect, but I just can't get into it. I also tried the beta on PC, and I will say the whole experience made me want to cry.
I will be renting it to play the campaign. Can't wait to gun the LAV-25, but I'm not expecting too much from it. Hopefully we'll get a PC copy at the office, because I'd love to check out some of their tech on DX11.
BreakABone
10-02-2011, 05:18 PM
Isn't that was a beta is for?
Betas... have more and more, IMO, this gen been turned into glorified demoes. The game is out in like 3 weeks, this isn't beta testing, its an online demo. Anything they gain from this test won't be applied until launch or even shortly after it.
From what I gather, they don't even plan to evolve the experience as they beta goes on
Angrist
10-02-2011, 05:48 PM
Oh ok... that does sound pretty stupid.
Fox 6
10-02-2011, 08:14 PM
I know ive had some fun plays with Combine. Random snipers piss me off and there are some issues that really annoy me, such as infinite loading and falling through the ground. Its very rewarding when you rush a point and kill all the dudes and blow it up, or kill and entire squad single handed. There are a lot more options with you gun attachments like bi-pods and Slug rounds for shot guns and they put bullet drop into the world which is pretty cool. I can understand people complaining about not feeling too original, but to be fair, its only 1 map without vehicles, and COD has been repackaging the same damn game for years now and is so over the top, its a Michael Bay movie and people flock to it.
I think the whole modern shooter is beaten dead, but I played call of duty into the ground, so this is a nice change up. I also felt like this is more "military" than COD. Youre not some super uber special forces that fucking saves the world by yourself. Instead your a grunt right in the shit.
That being said, I plan on buying this game.
I've only logged about an hour so far. The first map I got into was so laggy but after that initial disappointment, the game has really picked up. Glitches aside I find the quick kill realism and squad based strategy very appealing. Maybe it's because I was usually well above 50/50 ratio...
My DirectX11 rig runs it quite well. The character models are so far quite shoddy and general texture issues abound but this is going to be quite a step up from BC2 once the refinement patches get released. I logged about a 100 hours on badcompany2 and lost interest with the console camp.
You can't just stick your head around a corner and blindly sprint forward without clearing the area and having a buddy keep cover. love it!
Sometime this week we should have a gametavern meet.
my tag is: snowjunki
the prone sniper issue is resolved if you play squad tactics with snipers on your team.
Get the PC version!
Fox 6
10-03-2011, 08:45 PM
Explosive Ordnance Robot makes this game awesome.
Typhoid
10-04-2011, 02:33 PM
So is the game as bad as everyone first thought? I haven't played it or even checked it out in person in any way, but when I saw about it I was pretty stoked at how real it seemed to have looked.
Do you guys (whoever's played it) think it's worth picking the game up when it comes out?
strengths/weaknesses?
I'd pick it up, simply to be in with the new community from the start. They'll be heavy patching it. Definitely a PC purchase...it really isn't no badcompany2.
So far, the graphics are so dumbed down, but that's ok because the gold release is going to push textures and resolution will really win it up.
I've been playing a fair amount of battlefield 2 because, retrospectively, it's still an awesome game. Really really good in fact. HBD Ghost Town is such a fun map with a dedicated server usually full up.
Try this game on the PC and see for yourself. Right now it's almost running like an internet browser window'd game. Almost... So it isn't really indicative of the final product, which explains why the game's development team is a little annoyed with the griping.
haha I'm sold. In fact, I'll probably break my rule and support their preorder dealio that gives the extra content right from the start.
I really have appreciated the building destruction and the POV that sees your hands and feet a lot more. Crawling in prone feels a lot more realistic. Hitting the ground feels like you actually drop on the spot, trying to cover as fast as possible.
The quick bullet damage is welcome because it rewards appropriate risk and really subdues the Michael Bay run and gun of so many other shooters.
PC VERSION!
Typhoid
10-04-2011, 02:52 PM
Well if I was to get it it'd have to be for the PS3; I've only got a laptop.
But you practically sold me on at least giving the game a shot.
but it's a PC game !!
i cry
Your game will only ever look as good as the beta :(
directx9 ftw
oh well. Would you play with a mouse/kb setup or analogs?
This is the type of game that I'd love to see a big developer shape for cross platform compatible multiplayer.
Typhoid
10-04-2011, 02:57 PM
I'd just use the controller. I play a lot of MAG, so I'm pretty used to/good with it by now.
Fox 6
10-04-2011, 03:09 PM
The more I play it the more I like it. Me and Adam found a hilarious strategy. I place c4 on his little robot and he can drive it into a bunch of guy or onto a capture point and then KABOOM!
The more I play it, the more I like it. Still not sold on purchasing it yet though.
Still very glitchy from my experience though (mainly falling through the ground, although a few times all the colors turned to blue as well, which was eventually remedied by dying). The squad-based element of the game is certainly the most fun, and once you're able to actually get in a squad with all your friends (difficult to do in the beta, hopefully not in the actual game), it's quite a good time.
Typhoid
10-05-2011, 04:12 PM
I dl'd and played the Beta (for PS3) for 4-5 straight hours last night even though it's only the 1map. I'm infinitely impressed with how constantly amazed I am at the realism of everything, and how fun it is.
I have no idea anything about squad stuff though. I was just playing the game and following people around or sticking near them to cover them.
Vampyr
10-05-2011, 04:22 PM
but it's a PC game !!
i cry
Your game will only ever look as good as the beta :(
directx9 ftw
oh well. Would you play with a mouse/kb setup or analogs?
This is the type of game that I'd love to see a big developer shape for cross platform compatible multiplayer.
It doesn't look like a PC game. Sorry man, this one has been consolized.
ZebraRampage
10-05-2011, 07:55 PM
It doesn't look like a PC game. Sorry man, this one has been consolized.
It's not a PC game? I was just looking at the official site for the game, and it definitely includes PC in there with the consols.
http://www.battlefield.com/battlefield3/pc
It doesn't look like a PC game. Sorry man, this one has been consolized.
Define consolized. I've noticed a lot of pc elitists using it in a negative manner implying that some negative aspects of today's gaming trends that don't have anything to do with consoles are the direct fault of consoles.
BreakABone
10-05-2011, 08:32 PM
Define consolized. I've noticed a lot of pc elitists using it in a negative manner implying that some negative aspects of today's gaming trends that don't have anything to do with consoles are the direct fault of consoles.
Reminds me of my Hierarchy of Gaming
http://nerdsontherocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/pyramid.jpg
But I can't speak for Vamp or anyone else, but from what I understand, its the dumbing down of certain aspects of games so that they are able to run comparatively on the Xbox 360 and PS3, which at this point are 6 and 5 year old technology, respectively.
That and simplifying elements of design so that they are better suited to work with a controller instead of the mouse and keyboard.
Reminds me of my Hierarchy of Gaming
http://nerdsontherocks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/pyramid.jpg
But I can't speak for Vamp or anyone else, but from what I understand, its the dumbing down of certain aspects of games so that they are able to run comparatively on the Xbox 360 and PS3, which at this point are 6 and 5 year old technology, respectively.
That and simplifying elements of design so that they are better suited to work with a controller instead of the mouse and keyboard.
Nice picture. LOL. Now, the controller vs. kb/m argument I can understand although it's not always true. Some times you are just adding extra stuff that is not essential or truly helpful to the game. The graphics downgrade is not nearly as bad as many of them make it to be.
Vampyr
10-05-2011, 09:42 PM
In addition to what BaB said, it also has to do with making bad ports - having control schemes that aren't mapped to a keyboard/mouse very well, or having settings that make a game play worse on a PC.
I'm actually more of a console gamer myself - I like to sit down with a controller and play a game on a system where I know I don' have to worry about requirements and such.
However, I do play PC sometimes, mainly through Steam, and the amount of bad ports out there has just really begun to aggravate me. You really have to go out on forums before buying any PC game and find out if it's any good on the PC or not.
For example, Transformers War for Cybertron was on sale on Steam a few days ago. I had heard it was a great game, and in the thread where the deal was posted people were going crazy about how good it was. Finally, before I bought it, I saw a comment about how it was a horrible PC port and basically unplayable on PC. Several people reiterated this, and all the people commenting about how good it was were like, "Yeah, I played it on a console."
This just reinforced what I said in another thread on here about how different systems should have different scores in reviews. It sucks to read a review of a game recommending that you purchase it, only to check the comments on the review and find that it's unplayable on the PC. You have to wonder how many people they trick into buying games this way.
Another example is Alpha Protocol. I bought this on a Steam sale a few weeks ago (only paid $5 so I'm not really upset about the money), but it was literally impossible to play on PC. The game had mouse smoothing turned on by default, and you couldn't disable it. What this resulted in was the inability to accurately aim the mouse - it made it feel like the mouse was moving along a grid. This is a setting used in console games to make aiming with a controller easier. They just never bothered to take it out of the PC port.
What BaB said about the graphics not being up to par is true, but my computer can't run games at a higher setting than an Xbox could anyway, so that part doesn't concern me as much (although it will when I get a newer PC!). What bother's me is lousy control ports, menu's that aren't built with a keyboard/mouse in mind, and settings that make the game unplayable.
Rage is another example. It just came out a few days ago, and the texture "pop ins" are so bad on the PC that it's virtually unplayable. Runs fine on consoles.
BreakABone
10-05-2011, 10:57 PM
In addition to what BaB said, it also has to do with making bad ports - having control schemes that aren't mapped to a keyboard/mouse very well, or having settings that make a game play worse on a PC.
I'm actually more of a console gamer myself - I like to sit down with a controller and play a game on a system where I know I don' have to worry about requirements and such.
However, I do play PC sometimes, mainly through Steam, and the amount of bad ports out there has just really begun to aggravate me. You really have to go out on forums before buying any PC game and find out if it's any good on the PC or not.
For example, Transformers War for Cybertron was on sale on Steam a few days ago. I had heard it was a great game, and in the thread where the deal was posted people were going crazy about how good it was. Finally, before I bought it, I saw a comment about how it was a horrible PC port and basically unplayable on PC. Several people reiterated this, and all the people commenting about how good it was were like, "Yeah, I played it on a console."
I think this works for anything, you wouldn't believe the number of shoddy ports there are on the PS3.
I gave up on Bayonetta due to the gawd awful PS3 version. I had a friend recently who traded in Enslaved on the PS3 for the 360 version, which he says is world's diff.
The Orange Box and so many other games, just aren't up to snuff at times.
This just reinforced what I said in another thread on here about how different systems should have different scores in reviews. It sucks to read a review of a game recommending that you purchase it, only to check the comments on the review and find that it's unplayable on the PC. You have to wonder how many people they trick into buying games this way.
But this doesn't advocate different review scores, it advocates different reviews, which are two diff things in my mind.
I think IGN does it from time to time, where they will have a note if a version of a game is vastly inferior to the one they are reviewing.
Unfortunately, the PS3 port of Bayonetta is a very disappointing piece of software. I love Bayonetta -- just look at my review of the 360 version for proof. But Bayonetta on the PS3 is a whole different beast.
The PS3 version has a lot of problems, primary among them being the excessive slowdown and loading. During certain scenes of high action, Bayonetta can slow down dramatically, enough to affect the gameplay experience. I can usually tolerate that sort of issue to an extent, but the loading problems are simply unacceptable.
IGN's Bayonetta review
After a few days, the PC version also has a perilously small player base online, ranging from 450-700 players total, with certain playlists consistently empty. Also, the dedicated servers that PC players expect are nowhere to be found, as War for Cybertron appears to use the same peer-to-peer code employed by the console versions of the game. The multiplayer remains excellent when you can find a game though, and PC players in particular will likely appreciate the various PC shooter influences War for Cybertron draws from. The game is also likely to run well on a variety of systems, though customization is sadly absent in the graphics department. In now typical Unreal Engine 3 fashion, you're limited to texture detail settings of "low," "medium," and "high," and a resolution and v-sync setting. For those of you that care, the framerate is also hard-locked at 30FPS. My Core i7 Win7 system with dual Geforce 260s kept everything super-playable at 2560x1600 with settings "maxed."
Review of the PC version
Rage is another example. It just came out a few days ago, and the texture "pop ins" are so bad on the PC that it's virtually unplayable. Runs fine on consoles.
What's really sad is id is formerly a pre-dominant PC maker, but it just seems like there is more money in console gaming. It only makes sense to focus on that, and you only have one console to aim at!
Vampyr
10-06-2011, 09:10 AM
Well of course there's always going to be exceptions - I'm just saying that bad PC ports are much, much more common.
And yes, I totally understand why they focus on console development first, but I find it hard to believe that it would be that difficult for them to change a few settings, in Alpha Protocol's case, so that the controls work on a PC. I think the bad press these companies get from releasing a really bad PC port is worse than if they took the time to improve that experience. They don't need to go back through and upgrade all the graphics, but making the game playable would be a nice improvement.
gekko
10-07-2011, 11:01 PM
PC games don't sell, which means publishers are never going to invest money into making the game play better on PC. Battlefield 3 is one of the few times where significant effort has been put into PC-only optimization. Even so, I wouldn't expect it to sell many copies on PC.
Vampyr
10-08-2011, 11:11 AM
PC games don't sell, which means publishers are never going to invest money into making the game play better on PC. Battlefield 3 is one of the few times where significant effort has been put into PC-only optimization. Even so, I wouldn't expect it to sell many copies on PC.
Valve does it pretty well. They build for PC first, port to console, and both versions end up being fantastic.
Fox 6
10-08-2011, 11:25 AM
MMOs tend to be quite popular, and there is still hype for them. "Star Wars: The Old Republic" has quite a bit of buzz around it. Do I even have to point out Starcraft?
BreakABone
10-08-2011, 11:38 AM
Valve does it pretty well. They build for PC first, port to console, and both versions end up being fantastic.
Valve has a vested interest in the healthiness of the PC/Mac platforms with Steam though.
Makes sense for them from a business standpoint.
MMOs tend to be quite popular, and there is still hype for them. "Star Wars: The Old Republic" has quite a bit of buzz around it. Do I even have to point out Starcraft?
I feel like a handful of them are truly successful, I mean in the last month, we've had 3 MMOs abandon the pay 2 play model for a free 2 play model.
And honestly, no one has found a way to do a successful MMO on consoles yet.
And this just seems like perfect timing, but with the recent release and problems with RAGE, here is what John Carmack had to say about PC gaming.
"You can choose to design a game around the specs of a high-end PC and make console versions that fail to hit the design point, or design around the specs of the consoles and have a high-end PC provide incremental quality improvements," Carmack replied. "We chose the latter."
"We do not see the PC as the leading platform for games," Carmack added. "That statement will enrage some people, but it is hard to characterize it otherwise; both console versions will have larger audiences than the PC version. A high end PC is nearly 10 times as powerful as a console, and we could unquestionably provide a better experience if we chose that as our design point and we were able to expend the same amount of resources on it. Nowadays most of the quality of a game comes from the development effort put into it, not the technology it runs on. A game built with a tenth the resources on a platform 10 times as powerful would be an inferior product in almost all cases."
http://kotaku.com/5847761/why-was-the-pc-launch-of-rage-such-a-cluster
Angrist
10-08-2011, 06:17 PM
Starcraft 2. :love:
It's pretty weird to realize I only paid Blizzard €45 once, while I've put so many hours into the game.
Edit: speaking of Blizzard, they're thinking of porting Diablo 3 to consoles.
PC games don't sell, which means publishers are never going to invest money into making the game play better on PC. Battlefield 3 is one of the few times where significant effort has been put into PC-only optimization. Even so, I wouldn't expect it to sell many copies on PC.
I'm pointing my finger at piracy here. Damn pc gamers don't want to buy their games, well it's good they get the short end of the stick.
Fox 6
10-11-2011, 05:52 PM
Back on topic.....
The beta is over now. Hopefully they fix all the prevalent errors. I had fun with the game anyways. I enjoyed the more realistic approach. Too bad the mortar I unlocked wasn't in the beta :(
I played the game, it was really fun but you can't do squat if your team doesn't work together. I picked up a sniper rifle and started getting kills. It's actually fun to kill someone and move from place to place. I found it challenging and fun. But right after I downloaded the beta the 360 decided to RROD, the cable modem died too because of some lighting and now I got the 360 replaced but I don't have internet at home yet. I'll be picking this game up eventually. It did seem fun. But I'll be going PC for this one.
ZebraRampage
10-12-2011, 08:43 PM
Is this game worth getting on the PC then? I don't have a PS3 or an Xbox 360, but I do have a really powerful computer, so if I get these kinds of games I always get them on the computer.
Is this game worth getting on the PC then? I don't have a PS3 or an Xbox 360, but I do have a really powerful computer, so if I get these kinds of games I always get them on the computer.
I'm down to a laptop since my PSU died on my PC so I cannot game on PC atm. But I've been reading input from this PC-centric forum I've been going to and so far everything pionts out to a well-developed PC version and not the half assed ports that PCs some times get. And the graphics are looking neater on PC so far (consoles still have a pretty version). But the biggest incentive, In my opinion, is that the PC version will have something like 64 players online vs. something like 24 on consoles and I do love to play in crowded servers. So I'd say yes. And once I get a new Power Supply I'll be running this on PC.
Blix, what PC forum you browsing? I'm looking for a good one that can help me with questions such as, "If I currently have a geforce X460 an want to devote it entirely to physx, what dual gpu addition should I purchase in order to optimize my ASUS Crosshair 4 motherboard?"
haha anyway, to bump this thread, I'm getting it for the PC. The PC version will most likely come out with a 128 player fix for the larger maps. BF2 has that player cap on some servers.
Also, I've got a question about PC monitors. I just moved from an apartment to an actual house!(small an cozy and really old). I have an old CRT samsung 19" that is blurry at all resolutions including native. don't know why it crapped out. So I'm in the market for a new monitor.
The way my room is situated, I'm considering buying a larger 1080p LEd screen and betting an arm-bend wall mount that would allow me to extend it through my room's door and have it ideally situated as a main screen for the living room since we only have an old 32 tube in there. This seems like a great idea since my room is long enough to sit back and enjoy the large screen.
My question is whether or not any of you have had experience running your PC on a larger 1080p and thoughts on how it stands up to desk monitors in terms of gaming performance and overall use. Lots of internet reading and school stuff so it wouldn't be for gaming only. I love watching movies as well so that would be a consideration.
Blix, what PC forum you browsing? I'm looking for a good one that can help me with questions such as, "If I currently have a geforce X460 an want to devote it entirely to physx, what dual gpu addition should I purchase in order to optimize my ASUS Crosshair 4 motherboard?"
haha anyway, to bump this thread, I'm getting it for the PC. The PC version will most likely come out with a 128 player fix for the larger maps. BF2 has that player cap on some servers.
Also, I've got a question about PC monitors. I just moved from an apartment to an actual house!(small an cozy and really old). I have an old CRT samsung 19" that is blurry at all resolutions including native. don't know why it crapped out. So I'm in the market for a new monitor.
The way my room is situated, I'm considering buying a larger 1080p LEd screen and betting an arm-bend wall mount that would allow me to extend it through my room's door and have it ideally situated as a main screen for the living room since we only have an old 32 tube in there. This seems like a great idea since my room is long enough to sit back and enjoy the large screen.
My question is whether or not any of you have had experience running your PC on a larger 1080p and thoughts on how it stands up to desk monitors in terms of gaming performance and overall use. Lots of internet reading and school stuff so it wouldn't be for gaming only. I love watching movies as well so that would be a consideration.
The forum consist of a small amount of people that post there daily. It's slightly more active than gt. www.razetheworld.com the founder (I think) Logan hosts tigerdirect's youtube channel. He really knows his stuff and there are a couple of other PC gurus out there. You'll definitely get a good amount of help there. Be warned though, there are some PC elitists that like to take jabs at console gaming.
ZebraRampage
10-13-2011, 05:36 PM
I'm down to a laptop since my PSU died on my PC so I cannot game on PC atm. But I've been reading input from this PC-centric forum I've been going to and so far everything pionts out to a well-developed PC version and not the half assed ports that PCs some times get. And the graphics are looking neater on PC so far (consoles still have a pretty version). But the biggest incentive, In my opinion, is that the PC version will have something like 64 players online vs. something like 24 on consoles and I do love to play in crowded servers. So I'd say yes. And once I get a new Power Supply I'll be running this on PC.
I'll be playing on my laptop, but it has an i7 Core Processor and an amazing video card. The screen's max resolution is 1920 x 1080. I'm glad to hear that the game seems to be pretty good for PCs, because I really have no other option.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.