Battlefield 3- Premium announced; 4 new expansions

[quote name='$hady']Battlefield facebook page:
get your last rounds in before we close the beta on Oct 10th at 12:00pm (noon, CET)

Sucks I didn't realize it was ending so soon! :([/QUOTE]

Damn, I just got up and thought I would be able to get a couple of hours in before it closes.
 
[quote name='jdawgg76']Are there any unlockables in the BF3 beta that carry over to the retail game? ....[/QUOTE]

If you are a member of the EA Gun Club there is/was a Beta Badge to earn for playing.

Don't know if it goes towards unlocking in game rewards, like there was for Medal of Honor 3.
 
[quote name='From the Kotaku interview']What's a way to make that better in the future?
One way of fixing the problem is… don't make betas. At least not open betas. Because often when you see betas, sometimes they are actually demos. But they call it a beta, to sound cool. This was a real beta, and I don't think people are used to it. They get the product, and they think, "you have to entertain me," because it's an entertainment product.
[/QUOTE]



Because they put out the Bad Company 2 "beta" which was a demo, then they put out the Medal of Honor "beta" which was a demo. Then they're surprised when people say the BF3 "beta" is a demo and then argue back and forth. They did that shit to themselves.

Whether it was or was not a legitimate beta build is beside the point, especially since it's already over but there's not that many legitimate betas these days that have as many graphical problems and glitches by the time they are in the beta stage and there's no excuse for that.

They are saying all that stuff is going to be fixed or already is fixed or whatever, if that's the case then I'm really glad because I'm still looking forward to this game even though I couldn't bring myself to play much of their beta, but the fact that they are gonna say people are whining about broken stuff is just ignorant especially when they are getting free testing to supposedly improve their product. People are going to judge what you put in front of them regardless.
 
What should really upset all these whiners is that six weeks of development time were taken out of the game to prepare and certify a Beta. I've been through that for a demo, and it's just a huge waste of dev time that could go to polishing the product.

It's pretty clear all they cared about in this beta was getting people to overload their servers.
 
Another article just hit joystiq from someone that spent 6 hours on the nearly final build.

Some noteworthy excerpts:

Releasing a beta for Battlefield 3 might be the biggest mistake EA has made with its biggest game this year.
Click to expand...

The main problem with the Battlefield 3 beta – the one that's out right this moment – is that it doesn't play like Battlefield 3 does now, how I assume the final game will play.....
The version of Battlefield 3 that I spent hours playing last week has weapons and damage that feel like Battlefield Bad Company 2. This, if you aren't sure, is a good thing. It changes the dynamics of firefights, allowing for each side to take and hold positions, and making flanking and tactical coordination much more viable. The increased player survivability also make vehicles in Battlefield 3 more fair than they would be with the beta's damage models.
Click to expand...

As it stands now, Battlefield 3's beta is a wellspring of misinformation about what your final Battlefield 3 experience will be. I'm glad for that – I enjoyed what I've played of this more-final build of Battlefield 3 much more than any time I've spent with the game throughout the year.
Click to expand...
 
[quote name='hustletron']I guess that sounds promising from a "credible" source, more of Bad Co 2 is not a bad thing indeed.[/QUOTE]

doesn't BC2 mean it takes a whole clip and a half to kill somebody? wasn't that something they claimed to change...."source"" conflicting with DICE info
 
[quote name='yahoosale14']doesn't BC2 mean it takes a whole clip and a half to kill somebody? wasn't that something they claimed to change...."source"" conflicting with DICE info[/QUOTE]


In my typical experiences it doesn't take a full magazine to kill anyone, however it has happened on occasion that it sure seems like enemies have. Usually blamed lag but it happens in other games too, even Gears 3 people eat up bullets from multiple shooters and are able to run away.

I think the point was that BF3 will launch with a Bad Co 2 experience.
 
That article made me feel a lot better, it addressed some of the issues I had with the BETA. Like I stated earlier, the only reason I'm keeping my preorder is because DICE has earned the benefit of the doubt with me.
 
It does sound promising, but reverting back to bad company 2 is a bad thing. I can understand upping the health a bit and fixing the issues where you get insta-killed, but don't go backwards.

Also, gaming journalists usually don't know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to multiplayer.
 
[quote name='Trakan']It does sound promising, but reverting back to bad company 2 is a bad thing. I can understand upping the health a bit and fixing the issues where you get insta-killed, but don't go backwards.

Also, gaming journalists usually don't know what the hell they're talking about when it comes to multiplayer.[/QUOTE]

Why is that? Seems like the ones reviewing multiplayer centric games like BF and COD would play just as much as everyone else. Or no?
 
[quote name='Nealocus123']Why is that? Seems like the ones reviewing multiplayer centric games like BF and COD would play just as much as everyone else. Or no?[/QUOTE]

First of all I wouldn't trust anyone who isn't hardcore into first person shooters. Most of the time it just seems like X reviewer got assigned to X game, or a senior reviewer will get COD or BF. The amount of the time they are given with the game isn't enough to give an accurate review.
 
[quote name='Trakan']First of all I wouldn't trust anyone who isn't hardcore into first person shooters. Most of the time it just seems like X reviewer got assigned to X game, or a senior reviewer will get COD or BF. The amount of the time they are given with the game isn't enough to give an accurate review.[/QUOTE]

That is why I will never let a review influence my decision to buy or not buy a game. They just review the big games and if they are not good at it, what do you think the score will be? For the most part, that is why I love alphas and betas, I get to test the game and form my own opinion. A lot of people hated the BF 3 beta on the consoles and PC too, idk about that one.

It really let you taste the infantry part of the game with no vehicles. I know BF is all about flying the chopper, tanks and jets. In my opinion the vehicle was too OP in the alpha on Metro. If you got to test the alpha you know what I am talking about.

BF2 MC on the PS2 got me into online gaming and into playing other shooters like Halo, Counter-strike and COD(MW series only). My brother and I put a combined 500 hours into that game. Ever since that game BF and DICE have never let me down. BFBC 1 and 2 and 1943 come to mind. Never really got to play BF2.

DICE and EA are not going to waste tens of millions of dollars to produce shit. Dice has always had problems with servers on launch. That was what this beta was for. For you guys that even think this build is even close to the final build, are badly mistaken. I know some of you think that this was a glorified demo, it was not. The "alpha" on the PC was better, bug wise than the beta. It took 6 weeks to be certified for the consoles. BF games don't go gold till about two weeks before release. Where as other game go gold a month before. Always working on making it better.

I am going to shut up now. Hope to see you guys on the battlefield.
 
[quote name='fatmanforlife99']That is why I will never let a review influence my decision to buy or not buy a game. They just review the big games and if they are not good at it, what do you think the score will be? For the most part, that is why I love alphas and betas, I get to test the game and form my own opinion. A lot of people hated the BF 3 beta on the consoles and PC too, idk about that one.

It really let you taste the infantry part of the game with no vehicles. I know BF is all about flying the chopper, tanks and jets. In my opinion the vehicle was too OP in the alpha on Metro. If you got to test the alpha you know what I am talking about.

BF2 MC on the PS2 got me into online gaming and into playing other shooters like Halo, Counter-strike and COD(MW series only). My brother and I put a combined 500 hours into that game. Ever since that game BF and DICE have never let me down. BFBC 1 and 2 and 1943 come to mind. Never really got to play BF2.

DICE and EA are not going to waste tens of millions of dollars to produce shit. Dice has always had problems with servers on launch. That was what this beta was for. For you guys that even think this build is even close to the final build, are badly mistaken. I know some of you think that this was a glorified demo, it was not. The "alpha" on the PC was better, bug wise than the beta. It took 6 weeks to be certified for the consoles. BF games don't go gold till about two weeks before release. Where as other game go gold a month before. Always working on making it better.

I am going to shut up now. Hope to see you guys on the battlefield.[/QUOTE]


If it was a few years ago I'd say you should definitely be playing BF2, it was the legitimate next level from BF 1942, but since 3 comes out this month I guess it would be definitely something you should at the very least try and then compare between 2 and 3. I was really hoping for a BF2 experience on the consoles when 3 came out but it's not going to play like that unfortunately.


Regarding the Bradley in the beginning of Metro, it was overpowered if the defenders didn't do anything about it, the Engineer class gets like 6 RPGs if 2 Engineers attack it it doesn't become a factor. All about team work.
 
[quote name='yahoosale14']doesn't BC2 mean it takes a whole clip and a half to kill somebody? wasn't that something they claimed to change...."source"" conflicting with DICE info[/QUOTE]

aim better. use the ammo damage upgrade. shoot people not wearing body armor. don't snipe with engineer weapons.

You'll be taking people down like a pro in no time!
 
http://nzgamer.com/ps3/features/1028/battlefield-3-interview-with-karl-magnus-troedsson.html

There are also other things, like we’ve heard from the console audience that the hardcore players want more control over the multiplayer experience, so we’re now adding server browser for these people. It’s one of those features that the community has been asking for a lot, so we’re giving it to you.

Server browsers on console?!?! If this is true so excited.
 
[quote name='kiwimonster']http://nzgamer.com/ps3/features/1028/battlefield-3-interview-with-karl-magnus-troedsson.html

There are also other things, like we’ve heard from the console audience that the hardcore players want more control over the multiplayer experience, so we’re now adding server browser for these people. It’s one of those features that the community has been asking for a lot, so we’re giving it to you.

Server browsers on console?!?! If this is true so excited.[/QUOTE]

Same here. I love the fact that they are for one having dedicated servers and for two giving us more options for selecting them.
 
After playing the beta I have real concerns for this game. It seems rushed to get it out before COD but the beta is really messed up. I love BC2 but it had a lot of issues with MP at launch.

I am keeping my preorder only because I can trade it in the first couple of weeks and get most of my money back if the game ends up sucking.

Hoping for the best.
 
[quote name='skubish']After playing the beta I have real concerns for this game. It seems rushed to get it out before COD but the beta is really messed up. [/QUOTE]
Although i'm sure it'll be a great game, you're right - it does seem like it's been rushed out to compete with COD.
 
I miss being able to pick who hosts your game like in the first Xbox days and like in Counter Strike and Soldier of Fortune on the Xbox. I always knew who's game I wanted to play in based on how good the connection was so when I went to play again and saw that same host I would just join his game again.
 
Sorry for the basic and probably answered question, but will this game have splitscreen? If so, how many players per screen for local and LAN games?
 
[quote name='jantzn']Sorry for the basic and probably answered question, but will this game have splitscreen? If so, how many players per screen for local and LAN games?[/QUOTE]

Co-op has been confirmed to not have it, and I'm going to guess it's the same situation with competitive multiplayer. And I seriously doubt the 360 version will support LANs.
 
[quote name='skubish']After playing the beta I have real concerns for this game. It seems rushed to get it out before COD but the beta is really messed up. I love BC2 but it had a lot of issues with MP at launch.[/QUOTE]

Keep in mind they had to have the beta game code ready well before the beta to get it through certification so there are plenty of improvements they've made since. Granted, I'm sure they will have issues at least in the first week per usual with a Battlefield console game that has overloaded game servers.
 
Maps look amazing.

http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/bat...ran-battlefield-3-multiplayer-map-reveal.aspx

Damavand Peak, internally known as Base Jump, is built on the idea that we want players to be able to base jump, and features our most extreme height differences ever in a Battlefield map. Attackers in Rush and Squad Rush will start high up on a mountain ridge above a mining facility. The only way down into the valley is to somehow make the 500 meter descent. The further the attackers progress in the map, the more vehicle warfare will be present. There is also a large tunnel section dug into the mountain side at the bottom of the map, and the view when you look up at the starting location is spectacular.
Click to expand...

Wow, can't wait.
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I'm hoping for a handful of nighttime maps, so that I can get some good use out of that ballin' ass thermal scope :cool:[/QUOTE]

I expect 'remix' maps that have a different time of day, to be released, if Tehran is popular.
 
Found a couple of interesting things.

- More weapons will be in the full game.
- 10 more weapons in the Back to Karkand pack.
- UMP/Semi-Auto snipers will be tweaked, base damage of most other weapons will remain the same.
- Spawn immunity will be removed.
- The order of some unlocks will be changed.

http://bf3blog.com/2011/10/battlefield-3-back-to-karkand-weapons/#more-4298
http://mp1st.com/2011/10/11/bf3-spa...izable-red-dots-and-lasers-increase-accuracy/
http://mp1st.com/2011/10/13/bf3-squ...nd-more-a-dissection-of-the-near-final-build/
http://mp1st.com/2011/10/10/bf3-ump...es-to-bolt-action-rifles-and-hc-mode-details/
 
[quote name='JasonTerminator']They didn't think the beta had enough spawn killing?[/QUOTE]

Spawn camping was in the original Battlefield 1942 and it was great. People need to remember to protect their spawn. Just treat it like another base. As long as there are multiple spawn points, it can be countered if the team pulls it together. If they don't pull it together, then you should find a better team, play better or join another server.

Think about it. If it gets to the point where the team is raping your base, then how do you expect to hold a capturable base for very long? This isn't Little League where there is a mercy rule.
 
[quote name='Spokker']Spawn camping was in the original Battlefield 1942 and it was great. People need to remember to protect their spawn. Just treat it like another base. As long as there are multiple spawn points, it can be countered if the team pulls it together. If they don't pull it together, then you should find a better team, play better or join another server.

Think about it. If it gets to the point where the team is raping your base, then how do you expect to hold a capturable base for very long? This isn't Little League where there is a mercy rule.[/QUOTE]

It's dishonorable and not fun. This is a video game, you shouldn't be forced to rage quit because some sniper shoots you in the face the second you spawn.

I'm honestly not sure how you have fun spawn camping. How fun is it to shoot defenseless people? To make people mad?
 
[quote name='jasonterminator']it's dishonorable and not fun. This is a video game, you shouldn't be forced to rage quit because some sniper shoots you in the face the second you spawn.

I'm honestly not sure how you have fun spawn camping. How fun is it to shoot defenseless people? To make people mad?[/quote]

+1
 
[quote name='Tha Xecutioner']I'm hoping for a handful of nighttime maps, so that I can get some good use out of that ballin' ass thermal scope :cool:[/QUOTE]

I will rage if there are night time maps. Those fucking suck. Anyone who played special forces will probably agree with me.
 
[quote name='JasonTerminator']It's dishonorable and not fun. This is a video game, you shouldn't be forced to rage quit because some sniper shoots you in the face the second you spawn.

I'm honestly not sure how you have fun spawn camping. How fun is it to shoot defenseless people? To make people mad?[/QUOTE]

People obsessed with their K/D ratio who suck at the game.


There are 30 second clips on amazon of the Battlefield score.
http://www.amazon.com/Battlefield-3/dp/B005U8D3R4/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1318778458&sr=8-5

The dark theme sounds amazing. A hell of a lot better than the actual main theme.
 
[quote name='Spokker']Spawn camping was in the original Battlefield 1942 and it was great. People need to remember to protect their spawn. Just treat it like another base. As long as there are multiple spawn points, it can be countered if the team pulls it together. If they don't pull it together, then you should find a better team, play better or join another server.

Think about it. If it gets to the point where the team is raping your base, then how do you expect to hold a capturable base for very long? This isn't Little League where there is a mercy rule.[/QUOTE]

That is an awesome concept, not in this age of the XBLX LIVE douchebag player though.
 
[quote name='slickkill77']People obsessed with their K/D ratio who suck at the game.[/QUOTE]

Must be doin' something right if they have them pushed into their own spawn.
 
[quote name='JasonTerminator']It's dishonorable and not fun. This is a video game, you shouldn't be forced to rage quit because some sniper shoots you in the face the second you spawn.

I'm honestly not sure how you have fun spawn camping. How fun is it to shoot defenseless people? To make people mad?[/QUOTE]It's only "dishonorable" if the team that's locking you down to your spawn gained that advantage in an unfair way (cheats, exploits, glitches, etc.). On the flip side, it's not "honorable" to spot the attacking/opposing team a few capture points or draw some imaginary line 100 yards away from their base, simply because they lack the manpower or skill to earn those points on their own and/or move up.

If you're part of the team that has pushed the other team all the way back to their initial spawn (or, never let them progress past their spawn in Rush mode), it's actually hella fun (same as before, though - as long as you're not cheating and as long as the game didn't start with something ridiculous like 8v12 or 5v10 in your favor). Padding your stats is always nice, but I enjoy it a lot more just knowing that I was part of a team of people who used good strategy and good communication to flat-out dominate another team.

It happens a lot when you play really well, and especially when you play with other good players in squads over XBL. It even happened quite often for me and my group of friends in the beta (when it was nearly impossible for buddies to end up in your squad and on your team sometimes). Once we had the other team locked down, it's not usually about showing off and making people mad - it's just about closing out the game and getting on with the next round. It's just business.

Getting personal about it or taking something like that personally (if you're on the team being forced back to their spawn) is a choice you make, not one that's forced on you by "dishonorable" people. Focusing on honor over an internet server-based video game seems like fighting a losing battle, anyways. As many people have pointed up in situations like this before - just leave the game and find somewhere else to play. No big deal.
 
screenshots look good enough for me. Hopefully the whitewash of the outdoor envirnoments from the not demo gets resolved. Can't really tell when it isn't in motion.
 
So um, if you want the 360 version to look good then you'd better install that sucker.

http://www.videogamer.com/xbox360/b...ttlefield_3_standard_def_without_install.html

"The thing with the 360 is that you need to be able to give consumers a game where you don't have to install it on a hard drive, because there are 360s without a hard drive. So we need to give you the option of installing it, rather than just demanding it. You could call it a 'standard-def' version for the 360 if you don't have a hard-drive."
Click to expand...
 
The more info Dice releases on the game, the more excited I get. I can't wait! I'm totally ready to start healing and reviving!

Oh, and that new video they released is beyond amazing. x______x
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top