Battlefield 3 Catch-All

Scratched wrote:

I wonder if frostbite can handle people standing on moving ships.

Actually that's a propeller from a Seawolf class US submarine. Possibly the USS Connecticut (SSN-22.)

Spoiler:

I kid. I know nothing about propellers (rudders is a different story.)

Higgledy wrote:
Scratched wrote:

I wonder if frostbite can handle people standing on moving ships.

Actually that's a propeller from a Seawolf class US submarine. Possibly the USS Connecticut (SSN-22.)

Spoiler:

I kid. I know nothing about propellers (rudders is a different story.)

Spoiler:

:D I was going to say I was very impressed at first!

5 e-peen points to the first one to beach the carrier.

Scratched wrote:

5 e-peen points to the first one to beach the carrier.

IMAGE(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQpnrODVgLjHYikrxKJcfZfK3NFlG21M8_VA7nMPfpdUfJwkeCqHw)

Scratched wrote:

I wonder if frostbite can handle people standing on moving ships.

If people used to ride MAVs then there might be a slim possibility that players won't have bad luck deaths while standing on a moving ship.

I miss the days when I used to jump on enemy tanks in BC2 and knife gunners. It was even better when a tank driver would get out and I would steal the tank.

Land teaser:

I assume an air one is coming.

I'm waiting for the one with a close up of a giant mech foot.

And, the air:

Finished Battlefield 3's campaign today. Had it ages ago on the PS3 but couldn't get into it, much better with mouse & keyboard on the PC (especially on hard difficulty). The lighting the frostbite 2 engine is capable of is astounding. There was a lot of stuff ripped from COD but overall it was enjoyable enough, especially the aircraft & tank missions. Might give the online a go, see how it fare's on the PC, is anyone still playing it that might want to team up for some games?

On a note of Battlefield 4 they were talking about the frostbite engine on gametrailers & were mentioning since its getting released on the PS3 & 360 as well that they couldn't fully utilize the capability of the PS4 (& next Xbox) since its still the same engine & they give an example of the destruction saying that if there's 10 different points that are key to destroying a building there's not gonna be 20 on the next gen & PC, something to that effect. Be interesting to see how it holds up to Killzone visually considering that's being developed solely for the PS4.

Muhahahaha, shipped my computer via Fedex' ship and pack. After replacing the busted heatsink (courtesy of Fedex), I am now 30/5 mbps and ready to go!

Are people still playing BF3?

Pikey26 wrote:

Muhahahaha, shipped my computer via Fedex' ship and pack. After replacing the busted heatsink (courtesy of Fedex), I am now 30/5 mbps and ready to go!

Are people still playing BF3?

Played a bit today with Gimpy. Pop in and out, although I'm traveling during the week a lot.

With the release of End Game I've picked up my play time. The new maps are pretty fun but I don't know how you'll feel about them as they are primarily more open. Although on TDM they can be super crazy.

Spikeout wrote:

On a note of Battlefield 4 they were talking about the frostbite engine on gametrailers & were mentioning since its getting released on the PS3 & 360 as well that they couldn't fully utilize the capability of the PS4 (& next Xbox) since its still the same engine & they give an example of the destruction saying that if there's 10 different points that are key to destroying a building there's not gonna be 20 on the next gen & PC, something to that effect. Be interesting to see how it holds up to Killzone visually considering that's being developed solely for the PS4.

And now I'm wondering how much is different and how much is common between the different versions. I hate to be a downer, and I know compromises are inherent in any project, but it sounds like compromises were made in the pursuit of having the game spread over as many platforms as possible. I guess the problem is trying to keep the base game common across all platforms, rather than putting the effort into individual platforms, so you've got the best 360/PS3 version, the best PS4/720 version, the best PC version, etc, even if they're not quite the same (and I'm not even thinking about graphics).

A lot of games seem to be going down the route of cross generation releases this x-mas. You have Watch Dogs, Assassins Creed 4 & beyond that Destiny. It does make you then wonder if they are getting the most out of the physics, animation & A.I never mind graphics. I guess once it gets revealed on Wednesday we will see how much a jump the frostbite 2.5 is from BF3 (they are calling it a complete overhaul). One good factor is that its lead development is the PC so that bodes well for the PS4/Next Xbox.

Cross generation games are only natural, because there's no way in hell the PS4/720 would have sold enough, and you'd be placing a large bet that the majority of owners of those consoles would purchase your game if you made it purely next-gen.

Spikeout wrote:

One good factor is that its lead development is the PC so that bodes well for the PS4/Next Xbox.

They said that last time too. Pinch of salt.

Scratched wrote:

They said that last time too. Pinch of salt.

Very true. Then they backtracked close to release.

I suspect we'll see this like Bungie is doing, released on PC, PS4, XBox whatever, PS3, Xbox 360, and may WiiU. Those last three will be smaller maps/less players.

Leaked commercial. 17 minutes of gameplay coming later.

Animated form since the vid was taken down.

IMAGE(https://i.minus.com/iEuu5UPeiTMlN.gif)

Saw the full 17-minute thing before EA pulled it down. Can I say it pretty much felt like EA's version of a Call of Duty game?

here's the official 17 min video

Prederick wrote:

Saw the full 17-minute thing before EA pulled it down. Can I say it pretty much felt like EA's version of a Call of Duty game?

The Battlefield 3 single-player was much the same, even I'm starting to find the constant rehash of modern warfare pretty tiring. I'm not really seeing a compelling reason for why this is coming out so soon after Battlefield 3, it looks to be just more of the same (albeit, a lot prettier).

Redwing wrote:
Prederick wrote:

Saw the full 17-minute thing before EA pulled it down. Can I say it pretty much felt like EA's version of a Call of Duty game?

The Battlefield 3 single-player was much the same, even I'm starting to find the constant rehash of modern warfare pretty tiring. I'm not really seeing a compelling reason for why this is coming out so soon after Battlefield 3, it looks to be just more of the same (albeit, a lot prettier).

Yeah I'm pretty underwhelmed by the video. Kinda wish they'd forget about campaign modes and just focus on improving the multiplayer experience. For me, that mostly means more, more maps. Give me dozens. I get tired of the achievement-y stuff, but if you make it so I unlock more maps by leveling up (or pay to shortcut the process), I will accept that all too willingly, and enjoy it.

This is the game that could make me go next gen early but I am dreading finding out how much this and a 720 will cost.

No COD style campaign and no unlock treadmill would be a brave move but, since everyone has to buy the release title, it might be a good time to try.

Press F to cut off leg reminds me of Homefront's press x to jump in mass grave.

It's not just that it's a MW rehash... well, it is. I don't entirely understand how developers like stories "edgy" without every actually doing anything genuinely forward-thinking or different. "Edgy" to them is "a civilian died!", but they can't put themselves in the position of perhaps telling a story from a non-American/European perspective. Edgy could be using the wars in Libya or Syria or the Balkans or Africa, although that'd get very tough and take a mature, sober. intelligent take.

Which they're not great at.

But like, what about the perspectives of the military in Brazil or India or the drug war in Mexico? Not just passing through them as part of your globe-hopping bullet-tour, but from those perspectives in the global wars they're always talking about. Why always Americans? Why are the badguys always Russians?

I don't know why i'm giving this as much thought as I am, everyone's really only interested in the MP anyway.

It's a bit Battlefield 3.5.

No 'follow' icon or 'go here' icons which is good and the bits of action we saw suggested letting you move about a bit more and think for yourself in terms of flanking, etc (heaven forbid) rather than the player having to be in the exact spot the game wants you to be. I like the little hand gestures. I hope they keep those. A squad of four guys is probably a deliberate nod towards BFBC 2 and, hopefully, an acknowledgement that those games were a better way to go single player wise. I enjoy a good single player campaign and, almost against my will, this trailer piqued my interest. I won't play the damn thing unless I hear good things because BF3's campaign was depressing.

Hopefully there will be lots of micro transactions :P.

Higgledy wrote:

It's a bit Battlefield 3.5.

I'm about halfway through that video and I agree. I'm not seeing anything that makes me want to buy this (over any other manshoot). I really want to know what's going through their head when they think singleplayer is the best way to show off battlefield, perhaps they've got marketing numbers.

I just can't get enough of shooting guys while hearing military jargon and doing it with birds flying overhead will be twice as fun.

Someone on shack pulled out this prose:

It is thrilling to witness peoples' reaction when seeing the game for the first time. It really makes you realize that we are at the beginning of a whole new era for gaming. As artists and craftspeople, we are focused on creating a dynamic, open design that brings people together with amazing, surprising unscripted moments that they'll talk about for days. That's the beauty of Battlefield.

They really love themselves don't they.

I'm not going to say there's anything wrong with scripted sequences (well, I won't right now), but call a spade a spade, what they showed there was a lot of scripted sequences. Maybe the multiplayer will be nice, but again, I'm expecting BF3.5.

Scratched wrote:

I really want to know what's going through their head when they think singleplayer is the best way to show off battlefield, perhaps they've got marketing numbers.

Normally I'd say that game play isn't as good at conveying the excitement as a cinematic action sequence but Dice's multiplayer videos are the most intense and most exciting out there.

Prederick wrote:

It's not just that it's a MW rehash... well, it is. I don't entirely understand how developers like stories "edgy" without every actually doing anything genuinely forward-thinking or different. "Edgy" to them is "a civilian died!", but they can't put themselves in the position of perhaps telling a story from a non-American/European perspective. Edgy could be using the wars in Libya or Syria or the Balkans or Africa, although that'd get very tough and take a mature, sober. intelligent take.

Which they're not great at.

But like, what about the perspectives of the military in Brazil or India or the drug war in Mexico? Not just passing through them as part of your globe-hopping bullet-tour, but from those perspectives in the global wars they're always talking about. Why always Americans? Why are the badguys always Russians?

I don't know why i'm giving this as much thought as I am, everyone's really only interested in the MP anyway.

Often we make up small countries for Americans to go fight in. I'd like to play as an insurgent fighting a made up modern military force with all the frightening high tech weapons and elite training of an America or Russia.

Higgledy wrote:
Scratched wrote:

I really want to know what's going through their head when they think singleplayer is the best way to show off battlefield, perhaps they've got marketing numbers.

Normally I'd say that game play isn't as good at conveying the excitement as a cinematic action sequence but Dice's multiplayer videos are the most intense and most exciting out there.

I'm thinking more that they know something we don't, that for them singleplayer is supposed to be a big feature of BF now. My impression is that singleplayer exists because DICE have the staff employed to make that half of the game so they need to keep them busy, but also to get more mileage out of the assets they've made.