Originally Posted by Necrozilla That tech demo reel was not impressive in the slightest and aren't we over "lighting tech" since 2007?

I believe that the lighting is one of many important aspects of a game; it sets the ambiance of the levels we experience. The demo didn't blow me away either but after reading a little about radiosity, it is not used in many game engines because it is resource intensive.

Supposedly, this is only a small glimpse of what Frostbite 2.0 is capable. My opinion is if it can handle radiosity (resource intensive) what else can it do?

Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Bad company games bare Battlefield in the forefront of the title and that makes it a part of the Battlefield franchise. Those guys who compare Bad Company to BF2, and even BF1942 are right, BD series is shitty in comparison. It does stand on its own and is pretty good but not next to BF2. It's an indisputable fact. I'm not sure about consoles but PC version of BF3 will stomp all over BC2 on PC.

I'm just not yet sure how destructible environments will work with the Karkand DLC map.

Originally Posted by Bazylik I'm not sure about consoles but PC version of BF3 will stomp all over BC2 on PC.

I would hope so. It's a game that came out March 2010 vs a game that is scheduled to come out Fall of 2011; that's over a year and half difference.

Though, I am scared until I see actual gameplay since DICE's last online (MoH) was pretty bad.

I wouldn't hold any light to MOH. They were probably given that project but it wasn't something they wanted to do. BC 1, BC 2, and MC were all fine other than some first day lag.

New Scans....
http://www.ps3blog.net/2011/02/07/ba...looks-amazing/


Whole game informer article
http://translate.google.it/translate...n&hl=&ie=UTF-8

M.o.H. multiplayer h.u.d. makes me worried.

Singleplayer looks like the original Bad Company concept.

Originally Posted by lordopus99 I would hope so. It's a game that came out March 2010 vs a game that is scheduled to come out Fall of 2011; that's over a year and half difference. Though, I am scared until I see actual gameplay since DICE's last online (MoH) was pretty bad.

It's not always the case. Crysis 2 looks worse than Crysis 1, and the time disparity is much larger.

Medal of honor MP was slapped on the game like a strap on to screw some player into thinking there is much more than a short single player. Which obviously over 4 million people fell for this trick.

Originally Posted by Bazylik It's not always the case. Crysis 2 looks worse than Crysis 1, and the time disparity is much larger.

Completely different scenario. It's a game that was originally built for PC exclusively (with max settings at the time; most people couldn't run it) vs a game that is made with consoles in mind. Crysis 2 final product hasn't released so who knows what it will end up like.

Medal of honor MP was slapped on the game like a strap on to screw some player into thinking there is much more than a short single player. Which obviously over 4 million people fell for this trick.

Slapped on... ha. Beta started 6/21 (game released 10/12); four months to enhance an already developed enough product. It was DICE's attempt at trying to modify it's Battlefield chops into Call of Duty's fast pace matches. Graphically it looked nice but gameplay wise failed miserably. Bazylik, Nice try though.

Originally Posted by slickkill77 I wouldn't hold any light to MOH. They were probably given that project but it wasn't something they wanted to do. BC 1, BC 2, and MC were all fine other than some first day lag.

I hope they took the feedback to heart but I wont know until I see actual gameplay footage. As for the second line, DICE isn't going to purposely screw over their name just because they wanted the paycheck. They attempted to modify their interface from Battlefield to Call of Duty in order to try and pull more users in.

I thought this thread was made for Battlefield 3? Not "Come bash Bad Company 2, all of you CoD hacks!!"

Originally Posted by lordopus99 Completely different scenario. It's a game that was originally built for PC exclusively (with max settings at the time; most people couldn't run it) vs a game that is made with consoles in mind. Crysis 2 final product hasn't released so who knows what it will end up like.

Different scenarios, similar output. Even crytek themselves said Crysis 2 will have better graphics than Crysis, looks like it's not the case. Marketing mambo jambo. People still can't run Crysis full blast on their PCs but I digress. The bottom line is that Bad Company games are inferior to BF2 in every way, besides maybe graphics. Though, personally, I much prefer BF2's look to BC2. I didn't mention that in my previews post but I quoted you because I am worried that DICE, even though the PC is the lead platform, will dumb it down to cutter to the console market.

Originally Posted by lordopus99 Slapped on... ha. Beta started 6/21 (game released 10/12); four months to enhance an already developed enough product. It was DICE's attempt at trying to modify it's Battlefield chops into Call of Duty's fast pace matches. Graphically it looked nice but gameplay wise failed miserably. Bazylik, Nice try though.

I still think it was just a trick. Most of the BF2 community knew back then that DICE was deep in BF3 and they just put together that small MP for MoH because EA had no one to turn to. I played the MoH PC beta and all the bugs from the beta found their way into the game. That is why I think it was a nice trick to fool people. And it worked. Difference of opinion here we will only have. Won't know for sure what really happened, will we?

Originally Posted by HydroX I thought this thread was made for Battlefield 3? Not "Come bash Bad Company 2, all of you CoD hacks!!"

Lol. It is BF3. We're just hoping they stay away from the BC mold. Plus we didn't have much to go on so why not speculate and rant .


So glad we are getting dedicated servers and jets for the consoles. I can't wait to see this in motion and of course hear the music.

Dedicated servers exist for Bad Company on all platforms. Do you mean the ability to view server/room lists?

I'm still pissed that they didn't support Battlefield 1943. Not one damn DLC added to that game. I played the crap out of Battlefield 1942. I would love to see a remake. I want to snipe Nazis again!

Originally Posted by Necrozilla Dedicated servers exist for Bad Company on all platforms. Do you mean the ability to view server/room lists?

No I'm just saying that I'm glad they are sticking with dedicated servers. Excellent choice imo

Originally Posted by slickkill77 No I'm just saying that I'm glad they are sticking with dedicated servers. Excellent choice imo

Yes, way better that way

Originally Posted by slickkill77 I wouldn't hold any light to MOH. They were probably given that project but it wasn't something they wanted to do. BC 1, BC 2, and MC were all fine other than some first day lag. New Scans.... http://www.ps3blog.net/2011/02/07/ba...looks-amazing/ Whole game informer article http://translate.google.it/translate...n&hl=&ie=UTF-8

Thanks for the links I think I have 1 more issue left; what a way to end a subscription. I'll dig into this in the meantime

I loaded up BF2 after a year or two of not playing it recently and when I saw the BF3 ad I almost creamed myself...I didn't realize they were really working on it, I thought it was just a rumor. I would love to play this on my PC but damn I would need some major upgrades...think I'll have to go with the 360 version due to lack of funding

Originally Posted by Trakan Have you played Modern Combat? Just curious.

I own Battlefield 2 on the PC...only played the Modern Combat demo on the 360.

BFBC2 is not "shitty." It was different. And I'll take BFBC2 over any other Battlefield game out right now in a heartbeat.

Originally Posted by Bazylik Different scenarios, similar output. Even crytek themselves said Crysis 2 will have better graphics than Crysis, looks like it's not the case. Marketing mambo jambo. People still can't run Crysis full blast on their PCs but I digress.

Again, Crysis 2 so far is a multiplayer console BETA i.e. not finished/final product. Wait and see the Crysis 2 single player before making such a claim. Then do your comparison... apple for apple...PC for PC. For all we know, they could be creating a PC version simultaneously with a Console version.

I still think it was just a trick. Most of the BF2 community knew back then that DICE was deep in BF3 and they just put together that small MP for MoH because EA had no one to turn to.

Man DICE must have been superhuman with a huge ass staff in order to churn out MoH multiplayer, BC2 Vietnam, starting Battlefield Play4Free, in addition to current BC2 support with VIP map packs and patches, and then to do BF3 all at the same time... what a load of crap theory. Prior to MoH, all they had was BC2 support. If they had been "Deep" since BF2, we would have more than 2 screenshots showing the actual game. We would have a full scale beta instead that is far off. My guess based on the timeline for scheduled releases is that they started on the project somewhere in December (if not January) once Vietnam was released and Battlefield Play4Free was being beta tested.

I didn't mention that in my previews post but I quoted you because I am worried that DICE, even though the PC is the lead platform, will dumb it down to cutter to the console market.

Well won't you be happy. In an article, they stated the PC is the lead version. Though the bad news, rumor is there will be no modder tools due to frostbite 2.0 complexity.

Originally Posted by lordopus99 Again, Crysis 2 so far is a multiplayer console BETA i.e. not finished/final product. Wait and see the Crysis 2 single player before making such a claim. Then do your comparison... apple for apple...PC for PC. For all we know, they could be creating a PC version simultaneously with a Console version.

We actually do know the tools to create Crysis 2 are all the same for consoles and PCs, there was a demonstration about a year ago on how fast and easy it is to create games simultanously using those tools.

I make such a claim because there are numerous screenshots, trailers, and gameplay videos that suggest that Crysis 2 is not even close to Crysis in graphics dept. Crytek at one point said themselves that Crysis 2 will look better so I will compare it Crysis 1. If you don't like it, well, you can eat your apples.

Originally Posted by lordopus99 Man DICE must have been superhuman with a huge ass staff in order to churn out MoH multiplayer, BC2 Vietnam, starting Battlefield Play4Free, in addition to current BC2 support with VIP map packs and patches, and then to do BF3 all at the same time... what a load of crap theory. Prior to MoH, all they had was BC2 support. If they had been "Deep" since BF2, we would have more than 2 screenshots showing the actual game. We would have a full scale beta instead that is far off. My guess based on the timeline for scheduled releases is that they started on the project somewhere in December (if not January) once Vietnam was released and Battlefield Play4Free was being beta tested.

If you really knew how big DICE is I bet you wouldn't even make that comment. You give me BC Vietnam and Play4Free as an examples. lol. Give me a break. Valve announced HL2 and they released it 9 months later, that doesn't mean they only worked on HL2 9 months, does it?
Because you didn't hear anything about BF3, it doesn't mean DICE hasn't been working on it. And since DICE does indeed have a huge ass staff, they could afford to have some staff deviate towards different projects (moh MP and BC2 Vietnam). Don't bring up Play4Free anymore please, that just makes you look silly. Have you even played that pos? And why do you sound so angry? You don't have to be always right with your assumptions, take it easy dude.

Originally Posted by lordopus99 Well won't you be happy. In an article, they stated the PC is the lead version. Though the bad news, rumor is there will be no modder tools due to frostbite 2.0 complexity.

Yes I do have my worries because all games that are on both consoles and PC, feel consolish on PCs no matter what the lead platform was. It worries me that they chose to say that the lead platform is the PC platform. I would be less worried if they said that they have two dedicated teams working on each version. I wonder what they said about BC2, I have both console and PC versions, PC version has this consolish feel.

Originally Posted by lordopus99 Again, Crysis 2 so far is a multiplayer console BETA i.e. not finished/final product. Wait and see the Crysis 2 single player before making such a claim. Then do your comparison... apple for apple...PC for PC. For all we know, they could be creating a PC version simultaneously with a Console version. Man DICE must have been superhuman with a huge ass staff in order to churn out MoH multiplayer, BC2 Vietnam, starting Battlefield Play4Free, in addition to current BC2 support with VIP map packs and patches, and then to do BF3 all at the same time... what a load of crap theory. Prior to MoH, all they had was BC2 support. If they had been "Deep" since BF2, we would have more than 2 screenshots showing the actual game. We would have a full scale beta instead that is far off. My guess based on the timeline for scheduled releases is that they started on the project somewhere in December (if not January) once Vietnam was released and Battlefield Play4Free was being beta tested. Well won't you be happy. In an article, they stated the PC is the lead version. Though the bad news, rumor is there will be no modder tools due to frostbite 2.0 complexity.

Read the GI article. They've been working on BF 3 for a long time. Its say they started honing ideas for BF 3 back in 05 and they started working on the BF 3 engine after Bad Company 1 wrapped up. Dice is a really big studio. They've released a game(s) or expansion every year since BF 2 was released.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EA_Digi...sions_CE#Games