End Game for Battlefield 3 is out

Zat

Commented on 2013-03-06 17:10:40

Thats what I call graphics!

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2013-03-06 17:13:05

No it's not :(

I can't wait until they announce the timed exclusivity deal for BF4.

In reply to

Sath

Commented on 2013-03-06 17:14:09

Great graphics for sure if it was on consoles.

Cool bikes.

In reply to

Viginti_Tres

Commented on 2013-03-06 18:50:47

I'd be happy if the game would at least run at a steady 30 FPS on consoles, which it doesn't.

But lets be modest. They could have patched the bugs that plague the game since day one (and there are MANY). They didn't. They could have tweaked the suppression mechanics to balance the guns properly, LMGs need love. Well, they didn't.

So this is the final product. I'm disappointed to say the least. Hopefully they'll get their act together and give better support to BF4. More frequent patches would be a start...

In reply to

Tinks

Commented on 2013-03-06 19:04:49

If they plan on releasing annually they probably won't support properly like they have in the past

In reply to

THU31

Commented on 2013-03-06 19:19:35 In reply to Sath

Posted by Sath

Great graphics for sure if it was on consoles.

Cool bikes.

I hope BF4 on consoles will be on par with the PC version. I have BF3 for PC and X360, but I suck on PC. Still, the difference is unbelievable.

In reply to

b0vril

Commented on 2013-03-06 20:58:30 In reply to THU31

Posted by THU31

I hope BF4 on consoles will be on par with the PC version. I have BF3 for PC and X360, but I suck on PC. Still, the difference is unbelievable.

I certainly hope they really push up the player count on next-gen systems.

In reply to

MrWhite

Commented on 2013-03-06 22:03:27 In reply to Viginti_Tres

Posted by Viginti_Tres

I'd be happy if the game would at least run at a steady 30 FPS on consoles, which it doesn't.

But lets be modest. They could have patched the bugs that plague the game since day one (and there are MANY). They didn't. They could have tweaked the suppression mechanics to balance the guns properly, LMGs need love. Well, they didn't.

So this is the final product. I'm disappointed to say the least. Hopefully they'll get their act together and give better support to BF4. More frequent patches would be a start...

Then be prepared to be disappointed again. Something just isn't right with BF3, but I think it's like you say: balancing issues. It just feels too shallow in places. I personally got more enjoyment and thrills out of playing Bad Company 2 on the consoles and I've been playing BF3 on PC. Strange but true.

In reply to

asdfg

Commented on 2013-03-06 22:07:58 In reply to MrWhite

Posted by MrWhite

Then be prepared to be disappointed again. Something just isn't right with BF3, but I think it's like you say: balancing issues. It just feels too shallow in places. I personally got more enjoyment and thrills out of playing Bad Company 2 on the consoles and I've been playing BF3 on PC. Strange but true.

You sir speak the truth.

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2013-03-06 22:10:01

Meh.. BC2 is crap. You can't even friggin' strafe while you run!

Movement and gunplay in BF3 are worlds better. I also think the gun balance is pretty fantastic in this game. I'm pretty sick of hearing scrubs cry about the M16 and AEK when there are plenty of viable weapons to use against them.

I just think they need to cut the fat and focus. We're up to 11 game modes in BF3. That's ridiculous. And less lag compensation please. Maybe that would stop US servers from being dominated by EU/RU players during the day :D

When I hear the drivel falling out of EA's CFO's mouth in reference to this game I fear for the future.. but DICE is a pretty beefy studio. They can handle this level of output. 2142 came out less than a year after BF2.

That's just no guarantee it will be any better :P

Posted by b0vril

I certainly hope they really push up the player count on next-gen systems.

I think it probably should. BF3 uses dedicated servers on consoles so that's not why they cut the player count.

In reply to

Meh.. BC2 is crap. You can't even friggin' strafe while you run!

Movement and gunplay in BF3 are worlds better. I also think the gun balance is pretty fantastic in this game. I'm pretty sick of hearing scrubs cry about the M16 and AEK when there are plenty of viable weapons to use against them.

I just think they need to cut the fat and focus. We're up to 11 game modes in BF3. [i]That's ridiculous.[/i] And less lag compensation please. Maybe that would stop US servers from being dominated by EU/RU players during the day :D

When I hear the drivel falling out of EA's CFO's mouth in reference to this game I fear for the future.. but DICE is a pretty beefy studio. They [i]can[/i] handle this level of output. 2142 came out [i]less than a year[/i] after BF2.

That's just no guarantee it will be any better :P

[quote=b0vril]

I certainly hope they really push up the player count on next-gen systems.[/quote]

I think it probably should. BF3 uses dedicated servers on consoles so that's not why they cut the player count.

GriftGFX

Commented on 2013-03-06 22:18:57

I just hope these maps are more fun than Armored Kill. AK is fucking boring. Aftermath is pretty fantastic. The more focused urban maps are much better in this game.

In reply to

GangStarr

Commented on 2013-03-07 00:15:26

unfortunately these look like they are gonna be empty in conquest like in AK maps. as Grift said Aftermath was an amazing DLC cause the map sizes were perfect for 24 players, the fact you could avoid vehicles if you wanted to made it fun for every class. when the maps is full of open spaces (AK) its just not fun unless you are in a tank thats been upgraded fully

In reply to

MrWhite

Commented on 2013-03-07 00:40:54 In reply to GangStarr

Posted by GangStarr

unfortunately these look like they are gonna be empty in conquest like in AK maps. as Grift said Aftermath was an amazing DLC cause the map sizes were perfect for 24 players, the fact you could avoid vehicles if you wanted to made it fun for every class. when the maps is full of open spaces (AK) its just not fun unless you are in a tank thats been upgraded fully

I take it you mean the consoles? That's the thing that pissed all over BF3's parade. I know a lot of people love to moan about the consoles, especially PC elitists, but in the case of this game, the console development truly did seem as if it gimped the game's potential. AK would be 64 player specific on PC. It's DLC that clearly had the intention for maps designed for that player count. DICE surely must have been thinking of adding so much if the game was PC exclusive. They'd have been able to design the game better with a singular goal from the outset. Having it being ported to the console only stunted it, surely. Hopefully with the new next gen hardware that won't be an issue. Hopefully their's a level playing field there for development of the next BF game, but as someone else already says, the next gen has a lot to answer for as far as player count goes. That to me is as important as hardware. It'd be a pretty big fucking fail if BF4 launches on consoles with a gimped player count.

In reply to

[quote=GangStarr]unfortunately these look like they are gonna be empty in conquest like in AK maps. as Grift said Aftermath was an amazing DLC cause the map sizes were perfect for 24 players, the fact you could avoid vehicles if you wanted to made it fun for every class. when the maps is full of open spaces (AK) its just not fun unless you are in a tank thats been upgraded fully[/quote]
I take it you mean the consoles? That's the thing that pissed all over BF3's parade. I know a lot of people love to moan about the consoles, especially PC elitists, but in the case of this game, the console development truly did seem as if it gimped the game's potential. AK would be 64 player specific on PC. It's DLC that clearly had the intention for maps designed for that player count. DICE surely must have been thinking of adding so much if the game was PC exclusive. They'd have been able to design the game better with a singular goal from the outset. Having it being ported to the console only stunted it, surely. Hopefully with the new next gen hardware that won't be an issue. Hopefully their's a level playing field there for development of the next BF game, but as someone else already says, the next gen has a lot to answer for as far as player count goes. That to me is as important as hardware. It'd be a pretty big fucking fail if BF4 launches on consoles with a gimped player count.

aphex187

Commented on 2013-03-07 01:12:42

I agree with White on BC2, great game and the maps just felt better than BF3's. Time for MS to take over the timed exclusive rights for BF4 then :(

In reply to

Viginti_Tres

Commented on 2013-03-07 02:24:59 In reply to GriftGFX

Posted by GriftGFX

Movement and gunplay in BF3 are worlds better. I also think the gun balance is pretty fantastic in this game. I'm pretty sick of hearing scrubs cry about the M16 and AEK when there are plenty of viable weapons to use against them.

Yes, gun balance on paper is spot on. I just have a problem with the way suppression works. The way it's implemented now just feels ad-hoc.

In an AR vs AR battle suppression isn't a big deal. It is a determinant to the balance between different classes, though. As an engineer or support I don't want to peek the corner that is watched by an assault from a distance. As I'm pinned down and need to change positions to get a better vantage point I have to use suppression to my advantage. The key word is "distance". That's the ONLY plausible reason to have it and changing positions at that distance should be the only objective you want to achieve with it.

Therefore suppression should have little to no impact on opponents that are directly engaging each other (e.g. standing perfectly still) and it should have no impact on close quarter combat. It should however ad deviation while making fine adjustments to a target running perpendicular to your line of sight. Which makes a lot more sense than your weapon suddenly getting completely out of control and leaving you vulnerable to someone rushing.

Getting killed in close range because of suppression is fucking range inducing. It's especially frustrating as an engineer. Your weapon isn't that accurate to begin with and once you add suppression it becomes almost useless even beyond 10m.

In reply to

[quote=GriftGFX]
Movement and gunplay in BF3 are worlds better. I also think the gun balance is pretty fantastic in this game. I'm pretty sick of hearing scrubs cry about the M16 and AEK when there are plenty of viable weapons to use against them.
[/quote]

Yes, gun balance on paper is spot on. I just have a problem with the way suppression works. The way it's implemented now just feels ad-hoc.

In an AR vs AR battle suppression isn't a big deal. It is a determinant to the balance between different classes, though. As an engineer or support I don't want to peek the corner that is watched by an assault from a distance. As I'm pinned down and need to change positions to get a better vantage point I have to use suppression to my advantage. The key word is "distance". That's the ONLY plausible reason to have it and changing positions at that distance should be the only objective you want to achieve with it.

Therefore suppression should have little to no impact on opponents that are directly engaging each other (e.g. standing perfectly still) and it should have no impact on close quarter combat. It should however ad deviation while making fine adjustments to a target running perpendicular to your line of sight. Which makes a lot more sense than your weapon suddenly getting completely out of control and leaving you vulnerable to someone rushing.

Getting killed in close range because of suppression is fucking range inducing. It's especially frustrating as an engineer. Your weapon isn't that accurate to begin with and once you add suppression it becomes almost useless even beyond 10m.

emetic

Commented on 2013-03-07 08:58:11

i couldn't stand bc2 map design. way to many choke points in rush mode and conquest had only 3 flags (mostly in straight lines).

dice should get rid of bullet deviation in bf4

In reply to

CEZARR

Commented on 2013-03-07 09:53:03

Do not like the graphics in battlefild - join the army.

In reply to

CEZARR

Commented on 2013-03-07 10:07:35 In reply to emetic

Posted by emetic

i couldn't stand bc2 map design. way to many choke points in rush mode and conquest had only 3 flags (mostly in straight lines).

dice should get rid of bullet deviation in bf4

Maps with flags in a straight line as a result of the most popular, look for example Metro. And if remove the deviation of bullets you'll get a stupid arcade

In reply to

emetic

Commented on 2013-03-07 11:26:59 In reply to CEZARR

Posted by CEZARR

Maps with flags in a straight line as a result of the most popular, look for example Metro. And if remove the deviation of bullets you'll get a stupid arcade

operation metro conquest is a mess. you can rank up points really fast, that's about it. i mean bullet deviation while being suppressed, it's annoying.

In reply to

deafwing

Commented on 2013-03-07 14:38:54

played it for two hours last night - it's not bad

In reply to

b0vril

Commented on 2013-03-07 20:13:02 In reply to MrWhite

Posted by MrWhite

Then be prepared to be disappointed again. Something just isn't right with BF3, but I think it's like you say: balancing issues. It just feels too shallow in places. I personally got more enjoyment and thrills out of playing Bad Company 2 on the consoles and I've been playing BF3 on PC. Strange but true.

I agree. I loved BC2 on consoles. It wasn't a perfect game by any measure, but I had a lot of fun with it, yet BF3 just seems to be a mostly frustrating experience.

In reply to

GriftGFX

Commented on 2013-03-07 20:16:24 In reply to deafwing

Posted by deafwing

played it for two hours last night - it's not bad

Cool. On a scale of 1-to-better-than-Armored-Kill how would rank it? :D

In reply to

crookedmind

Commented on 2013-03-07 21:42:52

I recognize those prefabs.

In reply to

mustacio

Commented on 2013-03-08 03:13:23

Im really pissed that not one of these DLC's added to the games co-op mode. Even though it wasn't a big focus on the game, it still was fun and would have been nice if they paid some attention to it after launch

In reply to

asdfg

Commented on 2013-03-08 04:08:18 In reply to mustacio

Posted by mustacio

Im really pissed that not one of these DLC's added to the games co-op mode. Even though it wasn't a big focus on the game, it still was fun and would have been nice if they paid some attention to it after launch

I'll be forever hateful towards Bf3 coop after being forced to grind in absurdum to unlock all the weapons. This before they patched it to take less time/points to unlock the weapons.

In reply to

End Game for Battlefield 3 is out

End Game

End Game Launch Trailer

All comments (27)

Indiana Jones and the Great Circle

Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 1-2 Remastered

Assassin's Creed Shadows

The First 43 Minutes of Loco Motive

Our Switch video of Ys X: Nordics

The Callisto Protocol is now PS5 Pro Enhanced