[Game] Battlefield 3

  • Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/
  • Weve updated the Tripwire Privacy Notice under our Policies to be clearer about our use of customer information to come in line with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) rules that come into force today (25th May 2018). The following are highlights of our changes:


    We've incorporated the relevant concepts from the GDPR including joining the EU and Swiss Privacy Shield framework. We've added explanations for why and how Tripwire processes customer data and the types of data that we process, as well as information about your data protection rights.



    For more information about our privacy practices, please review the new Privacy Policy found here: https://tripwireinteractive.com/#/privacy-notice

Grobut

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 1, 2006
3,623
1,310
0
Denmark
It will be more than a prettier BF2. Destruction, and vehicles that don't feel like they float above the ground will be in, if BFBC2 is any indication. The vehicles in BF2 where simply awful. In BC2 it actually feels like your vehicle is touching the ground. There are also two sets of animations in BF3... while they are incorrect, it will be an improvement over BF2 and BC2.

Even if not realistic, I do like the destruction in BC2. Rockets are actually useful for taking out structures where infantry is hiding.

I am sure the jets will be awful as in BF2... they should just remove them from the game (BF3).

But to say that BF3 will simply be BF2 with prettier graphics is just not right. It will be an improvement in some areas, and a step back in others (no mod support ect.).

That's all tech though, all related to the game beeing on a much newer game engine.
And whilst i don't mean to downplay the importance of engines, it's a very good thing they are evolving and becoming more capable, but truth be told, we expect them to, and any game would benifit from moving on to more capable tech, not just the BF series, and it really is a sepperate issue to the creative process of game design (yes yes, one might put some limits on the other, that's true, but they are still not the same thing).

It is with game design i see nothing new, i just see new tech on display here, the physics engine, the graphics, and that's pretty much it really, and thease are advancements that are a given when any game jumps to a better game engine, HoS will have improvements like that too, just because it's on a better engine than Ost was, it comes naturally with the territory, and is expected.



What i don't see is any creative innovation to improve upon the gameplay, take something like how people will get to take the Jets for a spin, a constant problem in BF2 as anyone could, and people would trample over eachother to get there first.
I see no attempt to fix that, and come up with a new way to do it.

I see no new combat mechanics, or even any attempt to rethink and improve upon them, it all looks perfectly standard.

I see nothing really new about the vehical combat, it's just powered by a better physics engine now, but how is it anything new?


And i could go on, but the point should be made by now, aside from the better tech used, what's really new about this title? How is it a generation leap in anything but the tech it uses?

I guess we could debate that the SP campaign is the new thing, in so far as it beeing new to the Battlefield brand name.
But then, it's not really all that new, Bad Company brought it to the series, and besides that, it looks so very Call of Duty, IE, been there and done that, so that's quite open to interpritation.

It could also be argued that the destruction system goes beyond just beeing tech, in that it is integrated into the gameplay in a big way.
But then i would argue: How is that new this time, compared to when BC2 introduced it to the series? Isen't BC2 the one that deserves credit for that? BF3 might make better use of it, but that's how it goes with tech, it usually gets better, so as an innovation, i'd say BC2 get's the honours there, not BF3.


What can we really point to here, and say "This really is something new!", without having to admit that we kinda expected it to be, because the game is run on much better tech now..
 

Flogger23m

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 5, 2009
3,441
538
0
It is with game design i see nothing new...


Wait, rockets that can kill infantry holed up in a building, turning what would have been cover in BF2 into concealment in BC2/BF3 is not a new game design change? :eek:

Dry reloads that take longer than wet reloads requiring the players to think more about when to reload isn't a game design change?

Weapon resting?


What's wrong with it? I've had no problems with it.


The menu in BC2 was rather poor in all aspects. Not a huge deal, but I'd expect better from a game with a high budget.
Saying none of these features bring new gameplay changes is like saying RO2's new features (its cover system, bullet penetration ect.) don't bring any new game design or gameplay changes. It is just new tech, right? After all, didn't the RO devs say that penetration was not modeled in RO1 due to engine limitations?


I understand that BF3 might not be a true PC game (though a better attempt than BC2), but to say there are no new gameplay or game design changes between BF2 and BF3 is simply wrong.

It is not as big of a leap as RO2, but it is moving slightly forward.
 
Last edited:

Zips

Grizzled Veteran
Mar 4, 2006
3,683
1,076
113
Rapture
totalgamingnetwork.com
I think there is a differentiation between arma realism and having practical stuff like cars that dont blow up after three bullets.
And since when has the Battlefield series been a staple for your dreams? It's never been realistic, never pretended to be realistic.

Yet again, you guys are complaining about a lack of realism in a series that never really had it to begin with. It's hilarious, absolutely hilarious seeing those types of responses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smokeythebear

Flogger23m

FNG / Fresh Meat
May 5, 2009
3,441
538
0
And since when has the Battlefield series been a staple for your dreams? It's never been realistic, never pretended to be realistic.

Yet again, you guys are complaining about a lack of realism in a series that never really had it to begin with. It's hilarious, absolutely hilarious seeing those types of responses.

I don't think he is asking for a lot of realism, just asking for no over the top action.

I like BFBC2 because it can be mindless, sometimes silly fun. That being said, if I had the choice of choosing between BF3 or BF3: Like RO, I'd choose BF3: Like RO over it.
 

I Faw Down

FNG / Fresh Meat
Jan 12, 2011
323
146
0
Annapolis, Maryland
I don't really pay attention to Battlefield games anymore, but I did notice that the ROF on the machine gun slowed down as the barrel got hotter. Maybe they'll announce it in a similar way they did prone? :p
 

Apos

FNG / Fresh Meat
Dec 3, 2007
1,749
1,436
0
Europe
www.enclave.pl
And since when has the Battlefield series been a staple for your dreams? It's never been realistic, never pretended to be realistic.

Yet again, you guys are complaining about a lack of realism in a series that never really had it to begin with. It's hilarious, absolutely hilarious seeing those types of responses.

Lack of even basic realism ain't a problem, but lack of everything else and fact that game is console port are. Also DICE/EA politics and how they lie about PC platform is annoying. DICE is being rude in case why they can't release mod tools. These are the main reasons why I'm not into this game.

FYI I played a lot in Vietnam and 2, mostly clanwars, but I had a fun from public game too. Since BC2 is unplayable for competitive communities, casual game is getting boring after a month and there are no mods around to improve the game mechanics/gameplay. So BF3 is going to be the same game as BC2 was with same package of DLCs instead of tools...
 

Grobut

FNG / Fresh Meat
Apr 1, 2006
3,623
1,310
0
Denmark
BF 3 a console port? Are you serious?

Carefull now, you know all thouse things DICE are saying about BF3 beeing a propper PC game and the lead-platform? They said the exact same things about BC2 before that was released, and it was a lie.

Don't be so quick to set yourself up for heartbreak, DICE really hasen't earned that kind of trust, so do yourself a big favour and take it all with a grain of salt, seeing is beliving with thease guys.


Just saying..
 

Rak

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 23, 2005
3,543
677
0
32
D
Carefull now, you know all thouse things DICE are saying about BF3 beeing a propper PC game and the lead-platform? They said the exact same things about BC2 before that was released, and it was a lie.

Just saying..

DICE never said PC would be the lead platform for BC2. They made it clear that it was going to be a port, but with PC special features.
 

Nimsky

FNG / Fresh Meat
Nov 22, 2005
4,191
945
0
Elitist Prick Nude Beach
BFBC2 was a good game on PC. I have played it quite a bit and not a single time have I thought "wow, this is so consoley". Don't blow things out of proportion, guys.

Who cares about exploding cars. Yeah, it's silly, but BF3 isn't mean to be realistic. It's an arcade game. Always has been.

That said, what they've shown so far is not overly impressive. SP will be shooter-on-rails again, it seems, and this is to be expected because BFBC2 had the same kind of SP. What's important is the MP, but they haven't shown any of that yet. So we can't really say if the game will be good or bad at this moment in time.