Battlefield 3- Premium announced; 4 new expansions

I don't see what the big deal is about playing a game with multiple discs. I just got done playing L.A. Noire which has 3 discs, and it was fine.
 
This game is going to be unreal, who cares about the discs.

All of the great games have been on more than 1 disc. Dice is just setting themselves up for greatness. FF VII, ME 2, Battlefield 3. :D
 
Why would I want to play with 64 people? I don't want the victory completely out of my hands. It's already bad enough when my squad has to pull the weight of 8 other people.
 
[quote name='timesplitt']you guys don't know the real problem


players
console version =24

pc version =64



damn consoles, still behind[/QUOTE]

...as well as smaller maps.
 
Yeah, while 64 players sounds awesome, the more I think about it, it would be pure chaos - but I guess that is the point. Real war is pretty chaotic, not some super tightly regimented groups of 5 players working together.
 
[quote name='timesplitt']you guys don't know the real problem


players
console version =24

pc version =64



damn consoles, still behind[/QUOTE]
It didn't work for MAG so why would it work for another...

[quote name='thrustbucket']Real war is pretty chaotic, not some super tightly regimented groups of 5 players working together.[/QUOTE]
Actually war is based on groups and designed attacks by leaders. Being that this is a game where most players play in the "call of duty" mentality (i.e. "I Do It By Myself"), people following others lead never occurs and groups only happen if people previously worked together.
 
It has been confirmed that all maps will allow for all modes. Dice also hinted at the possibility of a day/night cycle of some sort in the future for multiplayer since the engine allows for it.
 
All this footage makes me sad that I no longer have a gaming pc, as I have no faith it will look that good on a console.
 
It won't look that good but BC2 looked good on consoles so I'm not worried. The only thing that worries me is the servers. Dice games always have server overload issues the first few weeks.
 
[quote name='slickkill77']It won't look that good but BC2 looked good on consoles so I'm not worried. The only thing that worries me is the servers. Dice games always have server overload issues the first few weeks.[/QUOTE]

Really? I didn't jump on BC2 until late July '10 so I wouldn't know. Speaking about how BF3 will look on :360:, there were some leaked :360: screenshots of the beta today (link).

So when do y'all think we'll hear about the beta, after TGS 2011?
 
[quote name='htown01']Speaking about how BF3 will look on :360:, there were some leaked :360: screenshots of the beta today (link).[/QUOTE]

fuck, I might just buy this game for the 360 after all.
 
[quote name='dotCody']fuck, I might just buy this game for the 360 after all.[/QUOTE]Same here. I'll all but confirmed to pick this up. Just waiting on the beta to make my final decision.
 
"true battlefield" gameplay is conquest mode in bc2.... rush is a far superior mode of gameplay as it concentrates all the action on one area.... the thing that lacks in conquest bc2 is bigger maps and more people/vehicles.... otherwise pretty much the same
 
[quote name='nasum']so the campaign is the afterthought? Go figure...[/QUOTE]

Well technically with Battlefield single player has always been an afterthought until Bad Company came around. Even then the focus was on multiplayer. I may have the disk numbers mixed up but that really shouldn't surprise anyone that they split the multiplayer and singleplayer.
 
[quote name='Dr.Zoidberg']I hope with this air support they have something for us grunts to shoot them down with.[/QUOTE]

My one major complaint against BF2 was if someone had air superiority the other team was pretty much fucked. They have to have better lock ons with the new game or maps with heavy air support are going to suck ass.
 
[quote name='caseyryback']my one major complaint against bf2 was if someone had air superiority the other team was pretty much fucked. [/quote]

+1
 
Hopefully it's not like BF2, where aircraft can constantly spam flares to break the lock-on.

On some of the maps, you had better chances downing the aircraft with ground fire than you did with missiles or AA emplacements.
 
Sadly no commander anymore.
I think thats what i have liked about BF. It made it more strategic and not just rush and kill. Well that anyway, but your team could hold on to the same strategy at least.
 
[quote name='htown01']Why does it take 2 weeks to approve content on XBL and PSN?[/QUOTE]

Remember when they released animal porn on the Marketplace? Because I don't. ;)
 
[quote name='dotCody']Remember when they released animal porn on the Marketplace? Because I don't. ;)[/QUOTE]

What? :lol: Please do enlighten me Cody :)
 
Still no word on the beta? This is getting ridiculous.

I don't want it to interfere with Gears and I don't want to wait til October either.
 
[quote name='dotCody']Nevermind, you don't get it. :whistle2:s[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, I don't :whistle2:(

[quote name='Trakan']Still no word on the beta? This is getting ridiculous.

I don't want it to interfere with Gears and I don't want to wait til October either.[/QUOTE]

I'm not content that there is no info on the beta either. They need to hurry up and let us test this game out. I've been hitting that backlog lately, anticipating this release.

Btw, they posted Battlelog #11 today to explain the game modes in detail. I like the changes they're making for rush (even though I don't play it often):
[quote name='Battlefield Blog']
If you are familiar with this game mode from Battlefield: Bad Company 2, you might want to know we are refining it for Battlefield 3 in a number of ways, based on player feedback. Some of the gameplay tweaks we are bringing to Rush are:
* You cannot use explosives or shoot at the M-COM to take it out. Only arm and disarm.
* If the attacking team arms the M-COM but runs out of tickets, the match will continue until the M-COM detonates or defenders disarm it
* If the defenders start disarming an M-COM just before it’s about to blow, the explosion is prevented until the disarm is accomplished. If the defender gets killed during the disarm process, the M-COM will instantly blow
[/Quote]
 
[quote name='htown01']So it looks like 2 more weeks of waiting for the beta (link). Why does it take 2 weeks to approve content on XBL and PSN?[/QUOTE]

They need to confirm that it won't f*ck your shit up
 
Originally Posted by Battlefield Blog
If you are familiar with this game mode from Battlefield: Bad Company 2, you might want to know we are refining it for Battlefield 3 in a number of ways, based on player feedback. Some of the gameplay tweaks we are bringing to Rush are:
* You cannot use explosives or shoot at the M-COM to take it out. Only arm and disarm.
* If the attacking team arms the M-COM but runs out of tickets, the match will continue until the M-COM detonates or defenders disarm it
* If the defenders start disarming an M-COM just before it’s about to blow, the explosion is prevented until the disarm is accomplished. If the defender gets killed during the disarm process, the M-COM will instantly blow
Click to expand...

Not a fan of the first or third change...although at least in the case of the first one I can hear the argument for it. The third one stinks.
 
[quote name='KaneRobot']Not a fan of the first or third change...although at least in the case of the first one I can hear the argument for it. The third one stinks.[/QUOTE]

im ok with the first one since there are jets in rush.

but the third one is retarded thats for sure. why would the timer stop when the bomb are being defused??
 
[quote name='giantqtipz']im ok with the first one since there are jets in rush.

but the third one is retarded thats for sure. why would the timer stop when the bomb are being defused??[/QUOTE]

because they want you to have x minutes/seconds to defuse the bomb/mcom instead of say x-6.5 like in cod. i'd personally rather have it stop when the bomb timer is below the actual defusing time, but its a minimal change imo
 
[quote name='Battlefield Blog']* You cannot use explosives or shoot at the M-COM to take it out. Only arm and disarm.
* If the defenders start disarming an M-COM just before it’s about to blow, the explosion is prevented until the disarm is accomplished. If the defender gets killed during the disarm process, the M-COM will instantly blow[/QUOTE]
That's some retarded shit right there.
 
if anyone is interested in joining a clan for either 360 or ps3 (or mw3 on 360) check out gamersunitedpro.com and apply in the forums! ask me if you need any other info
 
Even though I've played very little rush since I pretty much exclusively play Conquest, these changes sound pretty good to me. I am especially talking about the first change that is listed. I don't understand why anyone would be against that change. If you allow anything more against the M-Coms than arming them, it seems to defeat the purpose of Rush mode. In BC2 Rush, you could have a tank sitting up on a hill continuously firing at the building with the M-Com or someone loading up an ATV with C4 and going kamikaze towards the M-Com.
 
[quote name='bg88']In BC2 Rush, you could have a tank sitting up on a hill continuously firing at the building with the M-Com or someone loading up an ATV with C4 and going kamikaze towards the M-Com.[/QUOTE]

In Bad Company 2's Rush, Engineer's could use their Repair Tool to repair any damage the M-COM stations had taken


:roll:
 
[quote name='dotCody']In Bad Company 2's Rush, Engineer's could use their Repair Tool to repair any damage the M-COM stations had taken


:roll:[/QUOTE]
did they patch that in? when i played, you couldnt do that.

as for the first change, i liked damaging the M-COM, it added a different path to success. I mean, I get that you are supposed to arm it, but the thing i like about BFBC is that you have multiple ways to do things. arm it, C4 it, kamikaze it, tank it, collapse it, use enemy grenade launchers to destroy it - so many options. now you have one "choice."

you should be able to ninja it if you want, instead of setting off alarms. also, if you have a strong defending team or a weaker attacking team, you had a chance of at least whittling down the health instead of praying for a miracle arm and defend.
 
[quote name='yahoosale14']because they want you to have x minutes/seconds to defuse the bomb/mcom instead of say x-6.5 like in cod. i'd personally rather have it stop when the bomb timer is below the actual defusing time, but its a minimal change imo[/QUOTE]

The second part is what I don't like, how if you die while defusing, it will explode.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top