Would you like to add a little more substance to your post, give us something to think about and discuss rather than the vague 'gunplay in the old rainbow 6 games was better'?
Would you like to add a little more substance to your post, give us something to think about and discuss rather than the vague 'gunplay in the old rainbow 6 games was better'?
Fan boi alert ?
I have to go into detail and you can just state its good ?
Would you like to add a little more substance to your post, give us something to think about and discuss rather than the vague 'gunplay in the old rainbow 6 games was better'?
Fan boi alert ?
I have to go into detail and you can just state its good ?
yea....
I didn't, I stated it felt 'right' but that it was buggy... clearly not a fanboi. Besides that, its generally accepted in modern western society that positive criticism need not be stated in depth, but negative criticism should. Thats just the way it works.
Anyway...
In regards to bf3 w/ only infantry = MoH, I couldn't agree more. But I loved MoH, so that probably explains why I love this so much. Yeah, I love the combined arms aspect of the series, but I assume this is a good taste of whats to come.
The game is based around camping.. every corner/bush of the map, there is a camper.
The "Glow" over long distances people put off constantly is worthless.. and no.. its just not the flashlight it seems ?
Which is another thing. flashlight on your gun that blinds people ? really ?
The gameplay is extremly choppy, ive played shooter betas before.. this by far is the worst.
This one is personal openion.. every assault shouldnt be a medic...
Movement Feels clunky, along with aiming and how the weapons work. Very very arcade like. Reminds me of BF1942 assault weapons.
Gun balances is horribly off, this will get fixed, but so far its how it is. Getting sniped from campers and assault rifles setting back by snipers.
Sniper rifles, unless ive missed it, there should be a toggle to hold breath to aim more.. Almost all the snipers i see are just auto spamming, the zoom feels clunky and all over.. With the speed of characters and the amount of mass terrain, there needs to be a better way to aim.
Sniper spawn points.. intresting concept.. if the defenders werent spawning behind and in front of you.
Spawn.. run to camping location.. kill attackers as they spawn.. repeat.
Damage taken to kill, seems rather light.. as in, 1-2 shots and your dead.. Feels like playing hardcore on BC2.. which was.. camper/sniper fest 2.0.
Im going to go on a limb.. and assume all the terrain, graphic and visual bugs will be fixed. Ive seen spots where if you run, drop prone, you fall through the ground, then can lay there and kill on certain locations.
Ive noticed some cannot tell who is who on each team, spawned behind the attackers walked up and knifed 5.. a few from in front without being shot as they didnt realize i was the enemy i guess ? Not sure how they have this issue though.
Things i do like.. there few right now..
Knife kill animations are amusing.. as long as they dont "slow" you into them to just get shot.
Yeah, I played it for Xbox and honestly I thought it looked really crappy. The gameplay wasn't bad, but the graphics seemed like they looked worse than BFBC2. Don't get me wrong, I've been preaching this game to anyone who will listen for months now, I loved BFBC2. And yeah, not a huge fan of the map, and where are the vehicles? Glitches aren't cool either...DICE better get their gak together before release.
One map, one game mode, no vehicles, servers are crap at the moment (hard to get on, hard to stay on).
I know its a beta but still...
I want to like it but they got to throw me a bone or something.
Yea, went back to Space Marine and Halo myself
Gave it another shot tonight, they really need to throw down a map with vehicles. Right now every military shooter fan is just going to straight up compare this with CoD. Also, the massively linear nature of the map in the beta does not feel like battlefield to me and I liked most of the Rush maps in BFBC2.
So I guess my verdict on the beta is 'its alright, but would rather play something else'; but to be honest, I'm not much of a military shooter fan either. I pretty much play BFBC2 because my father asks me to.
It was a pretty mediocre experience imo. I just finished playing another couple hours of it and with no vehicles, playing a map we've already seen tonnes of footage of, it was kinda deadbeat. Very arcade like as well, they keep throwing me points for every little thing I do. Very glitchy as well (to be expected from a beta though), so it was hard to tell if the hit boxes were good or not.
The Audio is incredible though. On a surround home theatre system, it sounds amazing. Visuals are good, but can obviously can be improved (which is what they will be doing now).
Loving the suppression and bi-pod mechanisms as well.
I was completly against the PC matchmaking system.
but it doesnt seem all that bad, im not really sure the point of this.. but in reality, its not much different from in game browser.
I did come accross an issue where the browser started flashing like crazy resetting over and over in a loop. I'll assume that gets fixed also before release.
I ended up playing for 4-5 hours last night. I started being a camping hoe and was easily in the top 4-5 like the rest.
How bad is the vehicle whoring?
I really enjoyed bad company specifically because it wasn't 35 guys in vehicles all over the place and the moment you are out of one you get run over.
Only thing im hoping with vehices is Friendly fire off, i dont know how many times friendlies will just run in front of a speeding tank.. and of course.. the tank driver gets punished.
Yeah, I forgot I even had Space Marine until about 5 mins ago, lol...
The "Glow" over long distances people put off constantly is worthless.. and no.. its just not the flashlight it seems ?
Which is another thing. flashlight on your gun that blinds people ? really ?
Yeah, this is starting to piss me off... most real world scopes have an anti-glare coating on them these days, and the flashlight actually gives me legit headaches.
Sniper rifles, unless ive missed it, there should be a toggle to hold breath to aim more.. Almost all the snipers i see are just auto spamming, the zoom feels clunky and all over.. With the speed of characters and the amount of mass terrain, there needs to be a better way to aim.
There is. For PS3 you hold down L3 and you hold your breath.
Damage taken to kill, seems rather light.. as in, 1-2 shots and your dead.. Feels like playing hardcore on BC2.. which was.. camper/sniper fest 2.0.
Definitely true in a lot of cases, though I think there may be some issues with the hitboxes. I get a lot of headshots when I know I wasn't aiming at the head, sometimes I put 5 or 6 rounds into a guys chest (the hit indicator even flashes), and then I get killed, only to learn that the guy is sitting in 90%-100% health.
Im going to go on a limb.. and assume all the terrain, graphic and visual bugs will be fixed. Ive seen spots where if you run, drop prone, you fall through the ground, then can lay there and kill on certain locations.
I hope so and assume so.
The one thing I'm really hating (and hoping that will be fixed) is the current spawn camping setup. I get increasingly annoyed spawning and then dying almost instantly. I could understand it if it occurs when I spawn at the front on a squad mate, but it shouldn't be happening in your home spawn zone.
What I love is the environmental destructability (which there is very little opportunity for in the demo). Best thing is that it has immediate consequences... I.E. if you are standing underneath a section of the building you just blew out, the rubble will fall on top of you and kill you.
Spyder68 wrote:Thats the thing, there not more difficult to play from what i see.
You have semi auto sniper rifles so far.
So go lay in a bush, zoom in, and semi auto spam.
Alot easier to hide now.
Once you start leveling up the sniper class you get bolt actions. It gives you way more accuracy at longer range (especially once you unlock a 12x scope), its fun taking headshots from around 200 meters away while the semi autos can't even put the round close to you. Oftentimes its a 1 hit kill too, so they dont even know what hit them. In terms of the semi's, I prefer to use them as a battle rifle/marksman rifle for mid range hunting.
Honestly, I was really expecting better from the game, and while I'm aware it is a beta, I won't buy the final game if it isn't much better. They'll have to prove to me that the graphics are better than they are in the beta, because it looks like it's from 2007...and while gameplay is more important than graphics, battlefield is just bad.
thanks for the update
Also in real life surefires will totally blind you from a ridicilous distance away if shined into your eyes. So that isn't necessarily unrealistic, but I have a feeling it will be toned down by distance.
can you still cut down trees and such with heavy gunfire?
for GFX, im guessing you are playing on PS3 since that is what you are talking about, i remember dice saying that the console versions gfx had to be toned way down.
Grundz wrote:thanks for the update
Also in real life surefires will totally blind you from a ridicilous distance away if shined into your eyes. So that isn't necessarily unrealistic, but I have a feeling it will be toned down by distance.
can you still cut down trees and such with heavy gunfire?
for GFX, im guessing you are playing on PS3 since that is what you are talking about, i remember dice saying that the console versions gfx had to be toned way down.
Playing on Xbox 360, but yeah. My computer would laugh at me if I tried to run BF3 on it haha.
You know what annoys me even more? People that try to be sneaky while they have their tac light or laser sight on... get real people, it gives away your position.
Also annoying is how collision detection will move you if another player runs into you while you're taking aim...
I like it...it's acceptable. I do think the graphics are a little bit too "real"...you end up with a complete campfest. I went through periods of getting tons of kills just by lying prone in a bush somewhere. Bad Company was good about that...they removed the ability to go prone and it really prevented you from hiding in a bush the whole fething time.
I really don't like the map...the indoor environments are a bit cluttered and the visual distance is off. It feels like playing a game through a video camera. That said, BC2 was amazing and I have to assume that this is going to be just as good once they get the kinks worked out. Also I'm sure other maps are better.
I am getting one weird thing though...whenever someone aims a weapon at me, I get a BEEPBEEP BEEEEEP sound like Morse code. WTF is that all about? It's kind of nice because I know when to duck but it can't be like that all the time...is it?
Think it has potential but i was initially INCREDIBLY underwhelmed. I admit alot of his could be because i am on 360 (not it's native platform judging from the graphics)
I am a bit of an expert on game mechanics and here are my issues: -Stickyness of geometry. It is FAR to easy to get snagged, admittedly not properly (As in i cant move) snagged but ALOT of accuracy ruining 'view-bob' where there shouldnt be. -Unusual sprint activation, it either has a delay or requires a quick flick of the stick before you click it, either way it is jarring and an unnecessary complication. *Disclaimer* it could be my controller but bear in mind, i was playing BC2 yesterday. -Horrible graphics, on 360 the game looks awful, significantly worse than BC2. Only the lighting and Particle effects seemed to be better. -'Floaty-ness' the rumble has not been properly calibrated to the animation and momentum either has too much lag or not enough. This causes a sensation of 'floatyness' not present in most console fps' (apart from crysis 2, hmmmmm ). -Initial frustrations with the hud, especially the muddled mini map, but i'll give it the benefit of the doubt/more playtime. -The mantle animation, though cool, needs to be at least a frame shorter, it also needs to be less specific. Currently you can also turn 180 during the mantle. I.e you can start to hop a fence only to spin round back to where you started. I think i know what they were going for but it is too easy to annoyingly double back. -The spot and mark dot needs to be slightly bigger/clearer. Its a silly way to nerf it if thats what they were going for. -Guns lack 'Oooomph' the sound is fantastic but the Haptic part of the feedback isnt quite there. Likewise with the momentum they either need to put in more lag between [button press] - [hit] - [hit sound effect+rumble] or less. I would need the development suite/ability to use it to tell you which. All i know is the feedback is off. A plus is that the recoil is just right, severely punishing those how hold down the trigger. (At mid range at least lol) -Headshots have less logic to them. In Bc2 if you shoot a guy in the head you get a head shot. In modern warfare you get a headshot every so often even if you are shooting their legs from the hip. It seems this game takes the Modern warfare approach.
Perkustin wrote:-Headshots have less logic to them. In Bc2 if you shoot a guy in the head you get a head shot. In modern warfare you get a headshot every so often even if you are shooting their legs from the hip. It seems this game takes the Modern warfare approach.
Don't know what you're talking about. Hit detection is very good in this game, any legshots that result in headshots are most likely lag issues.
And anyone who can't figure out where's the best bush to hide in after playing Metro about 20-30 times deserves to give away tickets.
MrH wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:I liked the taclight at least.
It was so much fun to blind someone and then nail 'em with a tight grouping from the M4.
Using Tac light is a really bad idea, it completely gives away your position. I have killed so many people I couldn't see because of their light.
Uh, taclights are for rushing MCOM points on the second/third stage and for the tight corridor in the second area. If you're using them elsewhere you should expect to get killed.
imark789 wrote:Honestly, I was really expecting better from the game, and while I'm aware it is a beta, I won't buy the final game if it isn't much better. They'll have to prove to me that the graphics are better than they are in the beta, because it looks like it's from 2007...and while gameplay is more important than graphics, battlefield is just bad.
Wow dude, are you demanding better graphics than in crysis(no other game has ever done that) because crysis is infamous systemkiller.
Anyway I really like the beta. The gunplay is much better from bc2. In bc2 gunplay was a bit sluggish while bf3 it is really fluid and dynamic. At first I didn't like the damage buff dice added but after playing it kinda makes sense. Keeps the game moving. Also shotguns are awesome now unlike there were in bc2.
I think the graphics are awesome. I really like the various lighting effects which are lacking in many games (ie.space marine). Overall the game looks really nice even on low (which is basically ultra of cod). Although I would like if shadows were darker indoors for sneaking purposes.
Vaulting is awesome. BF3 makes brinks "parcour" look lame.
The lack of destruction and vehicles is sad but the main thing bc2 was lacking is infantry combat and bf3 beta delivers awesome infantry combat.
illuknisaa wrote:Wow dude, are you demanding better graphics than in crysis(no other game has ever done that) because crysis is infamous systemkiller
I thought crysis was a system killer because it was so terribly buggy. To this day, if I reinstall it from steam, get into the game, change the color of my hud, or the suit voice, it will crash on me. Or it will send out a helicopter that keeps coming back no matter how many times i shoot it down.
His Master's Voice wrote:Uh, taclights are for rushing MCOM points on the second/third stage and for the tight corridor in the second area. If you're using them elsewhere you should expect to get killed.
Correct, yet 99% of the player base don't use it like this.
Yeah, yesterday I watched a player low crawling across the 2nd floor of the building during the final pair of MCOM stations so that he couldn't be seen through the windows from the other building which was full of baddies.... would have worked brilliantly if he had turned off his damned tac light. it lit up the walls, etc. every time he moved, needless to say a clever engineer in the opposite building noticed and put a round through the wall right next to him.
Tried it on the PS3 and i liked it for a beta.
Graphics on the PS3 was a mhe.. a little bit of a letdown
Would have loved to get this for my PC since i hate playing FPS on consoles im a mous and keybord guy. That and it has 64 player support on the PC with bigger maps
But with EAs invasiv EULA on Origin that is required to play this game im just going to skip it and play something ells.
Im not going to let EA (Origin) scan my computer and collect data on what sofware im installin, uninstalling, when im using it, media im using etc and my IP adress.
I dont mind them scaning my hardware but this is just taking it a step too far
His Master's Voice wrote:Uh, taclights are for rushing MCOM points on the second/third stage and for the tight corridor in the second area. If you're using them elsewhere you should expect to get killed.
Correct, yet 99% of the player base don't use it like this.
They'll either learn or quit. Either way, it will go away with time.
On a related note, does anyone see the point of red dot sights? Yes, they can blind someone, but if you aimed at him first, he's dead anyway, and if he aimed at you first, you're most likely dead, no matter the red glare. I guess slapping it on a shotgun could work if you want to do some hipshooting, but considering how weak the base shotgun is, I don't see the point.
I think you men laser sight?
Red dot sights is the one were you dont have to use the iron sights and thus get a better view of whats infront of you while aming.
Just pre-ordered from Amazon.co.uk, hopefully I made the right choice. I have never used them for a pre-order but they're usually fast for normal orders.
His Master's Voice wrote:Uh, taclights are for rushing MCOM points on the second/third stage and for the tight corridor in the second area. If you're using them elsewhere you should expect to get killed.
Correct, yet 99% of the player base don't use it like this.
They'll either learn or quit. Either way, it will go away with time.
On a related note, does anyone see the point of red dot sights? Yes, they can blind someone, but if you aimed at him first, he's dead anyway, and if he aimed at you first, you're most likely dead, no matter the red glare. I guess slapping it on a shotgun could work if you want to do some hipshooting, but considering how weak the base shotgun is, I don't see the point.
I've been running it on my sniper rifles to keep enemy snipers from being able to shoot back at me w/ any degree of accuracy (when I go sniping in any BF game I'm primarily a counter-sniper first and foremost, easier targets considering how many of them don't have a clue what they are doing). Its been my experience that they are useless for hipshooting. At least with the sniper rifles anyway. My bullet never seems to go where the laser is...
And i can officially say, im buying this game now :p
after getting rid of the POS iron sights, and getting my weapon upgraded.. the gun feels right to me.. I guess it was meant to be a POS ?
After getting a decent amount unlocked, its very customizable.
Support gets a Mortar later on.. along with Claymore's
Engineer gets an EoD Bot ? not sure what it does.
After getting used to the realism.. its not to shabby. Ill hold finaly judgment to see if they get the vehicles correct, as im a tank whore/pilot when it comes to the battlefield series i hate footing it.
I unlocked the SOFLAM (laser designator for... air strikes?) for Recon class earlier today, I was extremely happy, until the unlock artwork that popped up on my screen displayed "Not in Beta".... broke my heart, all that work for nothing.
After about three hours of playing it, I deleted it. I can't believe you die easier in this than in Bad Company 2. Plus, I hate playing Rush...I prefer playing Conquest.
Other than the lack of health and the insane amount of camping, I really enjoyed it. The graphics were very nice, the weapon designs were spot-on. It was nice to not see the fething AK-47...They used the ACTUAL assault rifle of the Russian military. And including a select-fire option was really neat, too.
I liked the game, but I'm canceling by pre-order. I'll pick up a used copy for cheaper and go from there.
mega_bassist wrote:I liked the game, but I'm canceling by pre-order. I'll pick up a used copy for cheaper and go from there.
Same, thankfully though, the college I go to has a large gaming community, so camping and other cheap tactics don't effect me as much, but it is just another grey fps.
Spyder68 wrote:
Engineer gets an EoD Bot ? not sure what it does.
I'm gonna tell what the awsome bot does.
I't kinda like rc car you got in black ops but it's over 9000 times more cool. For example:
It was final mcom in the final map and we were running out of tickets (about 10 left). Luckily I've managed to unlock EOD bot.
So I mount my mighty assault vehicle sneak past all enemies like a ninja and slay without mercy defenders of mcom with godlike powerdrill. I arm the evil mcom and stay to watch the glorious fireworks of my awsome win.
Back when people didn't know what the bot really did, I got something like 15 kills in one match with it. Arm the charge, burn two guys, arm the charge, burn three guys, etc.
I even got a roadkill bonus with it after I run over a guy.
Gave it another play through. If you play INCREDIBLY cautiously it can be quite fun. You can have pretty cool firefights in the indoor parts. The outdoor part at the beginning though is a little crappy though, there are way too many places to hide and enemies always find ways into the spawn. I still dont go prone to shoot though, just on principle.
I have been playing engineer, though really should be playing assault, sorry 'medssault'.
Oh found out prone was a fan request. Note to game developers, never listen to fans, they are IDIOTS!
Dolphin diving in direct firefights is a bad habit, drop it. Anyone with a basic ability to aim will whack the dolphin nine times out of ten. And it's pretty essential for survival in a game with good sniping mechanics.
going prone in general gets you killed
you want to kneel with the option of going prone behind cover when you get shot at, not go prone and slooowlly crawl away when being suppressed
BTW: M249, suppressor, thermal scope, suppression enhance, is a big boat full of awesome
I'm going to need to make some quick guides for youtube, no one seems to understand how to use destructable enviroments to your advantage.
BEFORE I START.....(WARNING-WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!)
I am not a reviewer by trade or a game critic of any kind.Im just an avid gamer who loves pretty much any genre, esp. FPS/RTS and im not a fan boy of any game or series in particular.I Am however a Rifleman in an infantry battalion in the regular army with a few years of weapons experience and around 15+ different weapon proficiencies and have a good idea of what a shooter should 'feel' like to be realistic.
Im a few hours into the Beta now and as far as i have experienced it is already a fantastic game in its current beta phase.Dice has already announced a quite extensive list of bugs/glitches/balance and progression issues that are already being worked on as a result of player feedback.In addition to this they have stated that some graphical improvements/tweaks will occur before the final release along with tweaking of the (oh-so delightful) destruction physics.The beta will not be getting patched which is fair enough as its a bit of a waste of time.
Its important that everyone remembers that this is a TESTING PHASE released with the hope that the players themselves will discover most/all of the issues so they can be rectified before final release, and who better to provide feedback then dedicated fans who want the absolute most from a game, which Dice is prepared to offer after the beta issues are adressed. The game has an incredible amount of content, dice claims 100hrs per class at least.With vehicles on top of that.I was a massive BFBC2 addict and had a fair go at BF2 and i think this game is really going to outshine them by a long shot after its final release.In all fairness there are issues (thats a given and i have faith they will be fixed) some i have encountered are....
- The fall through the earth glitch - (EASY FIX)
- Too greater Inconsistencies in external ballistics of same calibre rounds between different weapons, eg bullet flight time/path/trajectory - (EASY FIX)
- Slight issues with some weapons firepower being too great or small at different ranges, e.g getting hit square with 7.62x54mm at 150ish metres and living then killing your attacker with 5.56x45mm at the same range- (EASY FIX)
- Fall of shot seems to great with sniper weapons, at least SVD, i was aiming two points of aim above my target at about 250m and dropping shots onto him.- (EASY FIX)
- Buggy knife kills sometimes - (EASY FIX)
- Graphical bugs and glitches, exactly as expected - (EASY FIX)
- Collision detection bugs can cause you to refuse to vault over an obstacle and just keep jumping into it (EASY FIX)
These really are the only 'problems' i have personally 'noticed' apart from the ones already being adressed by dice.I will not complain about servers or matchmaking as that is the most important part of the Beta Testing, prepping or fixing servers. I would have liked to have seen vehicles in the Beta (none on 360) but as dice said it was too unbalanced on that particular map and you can imagine why.At least i like to haha.A good hard foot slogging infantry fight is a good change from vehicle rushing anyway so i dont mind too much as ill have a chance on other maps.The Metro map has a few annoying bottlenecks and "Dog Spots" that are heaven for campers and snipers, but if something isnt working to defeat them change your tactics and you can normally get around it (sometimes through painful trial and error haha)
'Dolphin Diving' while annoying isnt really a problem as a few well placed shots still kill your enemy before they can kill you.Its like the real deal,the quick and the dead,you cant complain that someone dived behind cover and you didnt kill them,what would you really do if a few rounds suddenly whizzed past your ears while you were running??(I wouldnt stop and shoot back thats for sure)
PRONE while annoying, believe it or not,is a tactic used by REAL SOLDIERS in REAL FIREFIGHTS and has been for quite some time.It can also be effectively combined with crawling/cover and concealment to increase your effectiveness while reducing your enemies.As annoying as getting killed by the guy lying in the bushes is its a reality you need to face.If you cant beat em', join em'.
The weapons are accurately represented visually and sound quite lifelike and most that i have used behave realistically although as with all FPS could be more realistic,but im picky with that.Trust me its not as exciting or intense firing a weapon as you may think (thanks a lot hollywood) however the game does make it believable.
I think the graphics are great and so is the sound, especially the dialogue between players.People complaining about the console graphics maybe need a better TV? (unless you believe console will parallel a dedicated hardcore gaming PC, sadly it wont, even dice has openly admitted this) I believe i have read that sound/graphics/lighting will all recieve tweaking before release so it should be even better.I am impressed by the way the weapon moves while crawling/running/vaulting as i feel that it pretty closely represents real life.
Dying too easy...Please dont complain about this, it doesnt need to be explained.You get shot and you die, just like real life.i have survived a lot of hits in the game and have failed to kill a few people with solid hits but on the whole it seems like if you shoot someone in the chest 1-2 times they die,Always 1 to the head.If you want weapons to accurately wound instead of killing be prepared for a 9mm round to the thigh causing you to collapse hopelessly in excrutiating pain with a severed main femoral artery, followed by three minutes of half a dozen of your teammates trying to administer first aid without any success before you bleed to death.Or just take the kill like a man and get on with it.
Classes.Easily balanced between dedicated assault/medsault etc...tweak it to your tactics it works a treat.BUCKETLOADS of unlocks/customization that cant be ignored.
Taclights.Yes the are real,yes they are bright and yes they blind the S**T out of you.use them in CQB in the dark and youll see their merit.
Laserlights....Still nt sure,kinda cool,they hurt your eyes a bit, i think thats it haha.
Suppression system.Very welcome addition,another great degree of realism added to an already likelike (enough) game.
Thats it for now i dont want to bore anyone (else) to death.If you got this far i applaud and thank you.Hopefully have another spiel after another few days online.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In addition.....
The glare from campers scopes is an awesome addition and has scored me a sneaky kill by shooting into a bush on more than one occassion.
Yea it is sometimes hard to identify friend from foe on the battlefield..thats what happens when you think all the bad guys on earth are terrorists in robes and not soldiers in uniform.Keep your eyes open and stay on your toes.
The battlefield is a deadly and complex place, urban terrain is the most complex of all.Yes every bush,corner,burned out car etc could have an enemy behind it,or a bomb hidden inside it.Yes snipers will kill you the moment you walk into the open, and heavily armed will rush you with HE weapons and heavy fire.And yes,people will die and you will be scared and confused and disoriented...This is what a battlefield is like...this is what BF3 is like. The Name Says It All.
To note Oz, the beta is timestamped june
which means the beta is months behind the current built
why they would release a build for "testing" that is so old, with so many bugs and missing features a month before release is anyone's guess.
I actually looked into this today and the explanation given is that the beta was ready for all platforms some number of weeks ago but needed to be reviewed and cleared by microsoft and sony before being released as dlc.The pc beta has long been ready but was held back to be released simultaneously across all platforms..Lets hope they still have to time to sort this gem out hey.
Grundz wrote:going prone in general gets you killed
you want to kneel with the option of going prone behind cover when you get shot at, not go prone and slooowlly crawl away when being suppressed
i disagree. I've managed to get the drop on a lot of opponents (as a sniper of course) by proning behind cover to get into a better position. I also went 21 and 1 while prone in the tunnels, but I found myself a damn good spot that makes it very difficult to be target, it only really works while prone though.
- Fall of shot seems to great with sniper weapons, at least SVD, i was aiming two points of aim above my target at about 250m and dropping shots onto him.- (EASY FIX)
Definitely an issue. I was master of figuring out bullet drop on the fly in Bad Company 2. They seem to have revised the method by which bullet drop is determined for this because there seems to be no logic to it and I can't figure it out.
imark789 wrote:Honestly, I was really expecting better from the game, and while I'm aware it is a beta, I won't buy the final game if it isn't much better. They'll have to prove to me that the graphics are better than they are in the beta, because it looks like it's from 2007...and while gameplay is more important than graphics, battlefield is just bad.
Wow dude, are you demanding better graphics than in crysis(no other game has ever done that) because crysis is infamous systemkiller.
When did I say I was demanding anything, or expecting graphics better than Crysis? The graphics looks worse than Xbox 360 games from 2007, like Halo 3. I know I'm playing on Xbox 360, which is a 5 year old machine, but like I said, these graphics look really bad. Gears of War 3 came out a week or two ago and looks pretty damn good, so DICE should be able to make Battlefield look up to date, at least as far as Xbox games go. I don't expect it to look as good as on the PC, but I don't see why it has to look worse than BFBC2 on the same console, same TV...
One thing I really like about BF is that Sniping is pretty difficult. There's none of this cheap-ass quick scope twitchy shots. You actually have to lead your target if he's too far away.
I'm a terrible sniper, but in CoD anyone can be a sniper. Just point in the general direction of the guy and click the mouse, bam that's a kill for you.
imark789 wrote:Honestly, I was really expecting better from the game, and while I'm aware it is a beta, I won't buy the final game if it isn't much better. They'll have to prove to me that the graphics are better than they are in the beta, because it looks like it's from 2007...and while gameplay is more important than graphics, battlefield is just bad.
Wow dude, are you demanding better graphics than in crysis(no other game has ever done that) because crysis is infamous systemkiller.
When did I say I was demanding anything, or expecting graphics better than Crysis? The graphics looks worse than Xbox 360 games from 2007, like Halo 3. I know I'm playing on Xbox 360, which is a 5 year old machine, but like I said, these graphics look really bad. Gears of War 3 came out a week or two ago and looks pretty damn good, so DICE should be able to make Battlefield look up to date, at least as far as Xbox games go. I don't expect it to look as good as on the PC, but I don't see why it has to look worse than BFBC2 on the same console, same TV...
Oh xbox well that explains a lot but after looking some screenshots of xbox it doesn't look that bad (actually it looks pretty close to high on pc).
While Halo has more AA and AF it doesn't have fully dynamic shadows, 3d fog volumes, better lighting, destruction and scenery generally lacks stuff (small details like papers moving metro singnals, waste bins and rubble.
chaos0xomega wrote:
i disagree. I've managed to get the drop on a lot of opponents (as a sniper of course) by proning behind cover to get into a better position. I also went 21 and 1 while prone in the tunnels, but I found myself a damn good spot that makes it very difficult to be target, it only really works while prone though.
Yeah, i was referring to people that are actually playing the game and not sitting in one spot
They've said the beta build is 40+ days old, so I'm not too worried about bugs like that, they're probably already fixed. The one big issue I have with the game is teammates being able to "nudge" me, every game I get nudged out of cover, when I'm throwing a grenade, when I'm disarming etc. Squad members spawning on you nudges you also, they need to increase the distance they spawn or something like that, it wouldn't stop griefing but it would stop people doing it by accident.
While Halo has more AA and AF it doesn't have fully dynamic shadows, 3d fog volumes, better lighting, destruction and scenery generally lacks stuff (small details like papers moving metro singnals, waste bins and rubble.
And considering it's be..
Reach looks considerably better than Halo 3. If you're going to compare, you should at least use shots from that.
That said, I think BF3 looks fine on the 360, some of the textures are a bit muddy up close, but that is expected for the platform. That map they sent out on 360 is a really poor example of what battlefield is though, imo.
While Halo has more AA and AF it doesn't have fully dynamic shadows, 3d fog volumes, better lighting, destruction and scenery generally lacks stuff (small details like papers moving metro singnals, waste bins and rubble.
And considering it's be..
Reach looks considerably better than Halo 3. If you're going to compare, you should at least use shots from that.
That said, I think BF3 looks fine on the 360, some of the textures are a bit muddy up close, but that is expected for the platform. That map they sent out on 360 is a really poor example of what battlefield is though, imo.
He's comparing it to Halo 3 because I said BF3 had worse graphics than Halo 3. Which I honestly think it does, the textures in BF3 are god-awful. Foliage looks like it is out of Minecraft, and even on my gun they look far 'muddier' than I've ever noticed. Just look at image 15 from your link http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1070543/battlefield_3_beta_xbox_360_hd_screenshot_gallery.html
im loveing the bata. and i think it looks good considering im haveing to play it on the 360. and imo i allways thought halo was bad. not as bad as cod.but still bad.
He's comparing it to Halo 3 because I said BF3 had worse graphics than Halo 3. Which I honestly think it does, the textures in BF3 are god-awful. Foliage looks like it is out of Minecraft, and even on my gun they look far 'muddier' than I've ever noticed. Just look at image 15 from your link
http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1070543/battlefield_3_beta_xbox_360_hd_screenshot_gallery.html
I was gonna sign up... but then I found out it requires windows 7.
Thankfully I'm gonna get a copy of W7 for free (probably this weekend when I replace my aging and now non-functional seven year old dvd-rw drive) due to my school's deal with MS to obtain free software for its students (and due to this they have to use all microsoft/microsoft-endorsed products on their computers and appropriate classes).
Hopefully I'll be able to see if it lives up to its hype or if it's just another genericborefest then.
I played a couple games, hoping is was going to be amazing as all the hype my friends put up around it. I was majorly disappointed. Even though they are on the new engine, the graphics were nothing new, often glitches, and probably worse than MW2. While the game is somewhat enjoyable, I often get frustrated in the horrible unbalance and how impossible it is to see people. The major amount of glitches sorely hurt my playing ability and the fact that the game comes out in a month does not encourage me to buy (which, come on, that is the point of this beta). The minimal amount of variation, (1 map, 1 mode), I felt they really weren't in it to test much. It was sorely worse than the gears beta and halo beta. The only people I've seen defending it was fanboys, and to that there is no surprise. Honestly, I will not be picking up battlefield 3 as the beta sorely lost any hype I had for it.
I gotta say that imark789 was right about the textures on xbox version but I think DICE used lower textures on it because they wanted a smaller file or that they have not optimized xbox version as much as ps3.
And you dont need W7 to run BF3. You need a video card that has dx 10 or 11 (which sadly wont run in xp) so you can use Vista
The official minimum requirements for PC players were announced September 20, 2011:
Minimum System Requirements
OS: Windows Vista (Service Pack 2) 32-Bit
Processor: 2 GHz Dual Core (Core 2 Duo 2.4 GHZ or Althon X2 2.7 GHz)
Memory: 2 GB
Hard Drive: 20 GB
Graphics Card (AMD): DirectX 10.1 compatible with 512 MB RAM (ATI RADEON 3000, 4000, 5000 OR 6000 series, with ATI RADEON 3870 or higher performance)
Graphics Card (NVIDIA): DirectX 10.0 compatible with 512 MB RAM (NVIDIA GEFORCE 8, 9, 200, 300, 400 OR 500 series with NVIDIA GEFORCE 8800 GT or higher performance)
Sound card : DirectX compatible
Keyboard and Mouse
DVD ROM Drive
Recommended System Requirements
OS: Windows 7 64-Bit
Processor: Quad-Core CPU
Memory: 4 GB
Hard Drive: 20 GB
Graphics Card: DirectX 11 compatible with 1024 MB RAM (NVIDIA GEFORCE GTX 560 or ATI RADEON 6950)
Sound Card: DirectX compatible
Keyboard and Mouse
DVD ROM Drive
I've been playing it on PS3 so some of it differs a bit from the PC and Xbox reviews I've been looking at. There's some definate beta issues going on, but overall I am liking it. (with PS3 there's only the metro map to play on)
Right now the biggest issue seems to be holes in the map, lots of areas you start sinking into the ground when crawling and if you don't back out right away you end up stuck under the map. If you are in a key area it can be a boon as you can see and shoot people but often you will be bouncing up and down like crazy so the shots can be difficult. Very frustrating as it happens the most near the first A crate on the map and you'll fall into the blast craters regardless of if you are prone or not. Lots of times I've been running over to the crate to end up falling off the map.
It's also very easy to get stuck on small terrain elements and jumping only works to clear the object if you are directly lined up with the obstacle really annoying when you bump into a small rock and have to turn to face it in order to move over it. Particuarly when it's small enough you should automatically step right over it.
I do like that they have minimized grenade spamming in the game, the delay on tossed grenades is pretty long at times and they don't bounce around like a super ball. Which was one of my biggest beefs with kill zone and call of duty. They are still plenty deadly but not a noob tube resort weapon like in most games. I do however think the rpg is a bit weak, it seems to do less damage than the grenade when it should have a larger blast radius. The hand grenade seems to be much more lethal and I rarely seem to take non fatal damage meanwhile I constantly seem rpg splash damage from les than 5 feet away and just keep going along. The rpg should be a bit harder hitting particuarly inside the building where the blast concussion would be compressed and more lethal.
Sniper rifles seem to be a bit weak IMO, unless it's a head shot it takes 2-3 rounds minimum to drop a target. It doesn't pair up particuarly well with how they function in real life where even a round taken to the chest is going to down the target. They may not be dead isntantly but they won't be functioning much less running and gunning. The targeting is really floaty (even when prone) unless you have a bipod, very hard to actually stay on target much less pull off a head shot. There's no hold breath option which doesn't help. I find that it's easier to snipe with an assault rifle or the UMP-45 than it is with a dedicated sniper rifle, as firing in burst is far easier to down a target with and more likely to land a head shot with. That's really bad IMO.
One good feature is they added lens flare to sniper scopes so they can be seen at a distance if the light angle is correct.
The game is all about staying as low as possible and camping as much as possible, regardless of what weapon you use. I find the battle in the park somewhat aggrivating as there is an absurd amount of plants and rocks, I've never seen a park anything close that that level of landscaping. It makes for a playable map but it just doesn't feel correct. I have few complaints about the metro design as it feels more correct.
I find the tactical lights and lasers a bit wonky, yes tactical lights should be blinging inside at close quarters. But when fighting outside in the high noon sun they really shouldn't have much effect. The lasers seem to be overly shiny, lasers are a very focused beam of light and only blind if they directly hit the eye these lasers seem to blind if they are even in your general area. It would be nice to see some polarized goggles as an unlockable option that'd help reduce glare or light effects.
A huge annoyance is getting blinded by team mates who are running around like idiots with their lights and lasers on, for some reason they love to run forward to advance posistions and turn around to blind their team mates. Additionall the lights and lasers often seem to cut through terrain, lots of time you can be blinded by tactcial lights or lazers despite the fact there is a solid object directly in front of you. I've been blinded inside the metro from lights that are on the other side of a solid wall, hopefully that's just a beta issue.
I'd love to see how the vehicles play out, I really enjoyed the bad company games and using their vehicles.
My biggest two complaints are
1: The lack of being able to mute other players, it gets really old listening to somebody trash talking or their kids crying in the background.
2: Enemies not appearing on radar. It's very hard to tell where shots or noises are coming from even when you or otehr squad mates have a direct line fo sight to the enemy they don't show up on the mini map nor is tehre a way to mark them. In Bad Company you could spot and mark enemies by pressing select, and if somebody in line of sight to your team was firing a non-surpressed weapon they'd likewise be marked.
Overall the game the beta has been intresting and it's good enough I'll be picking it up. I do hope some of these issues are tweaked, they don't make the game unplayable by any means but they can be annoying.
-rpg and sniper rifle seem "right" the rpg is extremely deadly with explosion specialization or an ammo box and is excellent for destroying the enemies cover, not so much just directly murdering people
-sniper rifles are difficult to use which is never a bad thing IMHO
-camping gets under control real quick if someone on your team has an rpg, if lag is low and you can go prone behind cover before you die, or if you have people zigzagging through the map instead of going straight up it.
-yes being blinded sucks
-enemies /do/ show up on the radar if firing non suppressed weapons.
illuknisaa wrote:I gotta say that imark789 was right about the textures on xbox version but I think DICE used lower textures on it because they wanted a smaller file or that they have not optimized xbox version as much as ps3.
And you dont need W7 to run BF3. You need a video card that has dx 10 or 11 (which sadly wont run in xp) so you can use Vista
IE, you need windows 7, because gaming on vista is kinda silly
Caspian Border is open for all. A bit glitchy for some people, but a proper BF experience nonetheless. Go try it out if you didn't have the chance during the closed tests.
His Master's Voice wrote:Caspian Border is open for all. A bit glitchy for some people, but a proper BF experience nonetheless. Go try it out if you didn't have the chance during the closed tests.
Open for 360 as well? I can't be bothered with all of the hoops to install it on my pc.
Grundz wrote:
-enemies /do/ show up on the radar if firing non suppressed weapons.
What platform are you using? With PS3 they don't show on radar when blasting away with unsurpressed weapons or even when shooting the RPGs. Could be system specific glitchyness.
His Master's Voice wrote:Caspian Border is open for all.
What platform are you using?
Caspian still isn't available on PS3 :( Also no remote robots or vehicles that I've seen on the PS3 beta, although I've noticed they are appearing in some of the videos online.
paulson games wrote:With PS3 they don't show on radar when blasting away with unsurpressed weapons or even when shooting the RPGs. Could be system specific glitchyness.
You have to have the enemy in your sights and hit the "select" button to "spot" them
I've spent 35 hours of my life playing it on the 360, and even for all the glitches and COD kids, its gorgeous.
All the guns seem very balanced(with the exception of the UMP and PP-2000) and the classes are equally powerful. The advancement system is great and feels very rewarding when you actually level up or unlock a new weapon or attachment.
If i can only have one game this year it would be BF 3(with the exception of Skyrim)
I don't get why people call UMP and PP overpowered when they can only engage enemies effectively at short range and they can easily lose to a shotty. Both UMP and PP have heavy recoil when used in full auto and used in single shot mode they need 6-8 shots to kill in medium and long range)
I fell that MOD 0 and SVD are OP. They kill you with 2 shots (1 for head) at any range. After you unlock a non glare scope and silencer both guns basically become instagibs from unreal tournament.
I have never died to an UMP or PP at medium range but MOD 0 and SVD can kick my ass in a shotty fight, me using a shotty.
Just rape your way to enemy spawn, place beacon and continue raping if you die (happens when you run out of ammo) you just spawn on your beacon and start raping again.
Yeah, having played pc and xbox both now, they seem to be different animals
total lack of GUI on the PC for some reason (maybe eyefinity issue, maybe just not there(?) as expected, people are so accurate that everyone uses the ump or semi auto's and maul everyone.
xbox is buggy, you do get radar blips when people fire unsuppressed weapons, and people ramboing around, but surprisingly there's more teamwork because of build in voice chat (and associated annoyances)
Melissia wrote:Hm, beta's over before I could play it. So I guess I'll wait for a demo. No demo? Meh, probably won't get it.
You won't get it because there's no demo?
I mean, I kinda understand where you're coming from here, but plenty of games don't have a demo. Doesn't mean they'll be bad. I understand not wanting to take a risk, but a demo only gives you part of the game. IF you don't like that one part, you still might like the rest of the game. BF3 looks amazing, and from the trailers, well... skydiving in multiplayer is something pretty awesome.
Unfortunately for me, my PS3 broke right before the gaming release season. Hopefully it'll be fixed by Tuesday...
I'm not saying it'll be bad. Just that I don't really care to buy ANOTHER modern-setting shooter . There's bajillions of them out there. Haven't seen anything impressive about this one.
I'm not saying it'll be bad. Just that I don't really care to buy ANOTHER modern-setting shooter . There's bajillions of them out there. Haven't seen anything impressive about this one.
One thing that you may like is the fact that you can no longer spawn camp for helis or jets, you spawn into the cockpit of the vehicle much like in Homefront. This is a good concept and will cut down on spawn camping by your team for sure.
Taking note from Battlefield: Vietnam, helicopters are vulnerable to heavy machine gun fire.
Knives take two hits to kill from the front, and one from the back.
There is a camo system that allows a player to change the camo of their character and this camo is unlocked via leveling and changes for the Americans and the Russians.
The campaign looks interesting, short, but interesting.
Biggest difference between the PC and console versions is the size of battle. PC version has 64 players and almost double the amount of vehicles per match than the console version, for example if the console version has one jet per team the PC version has two per team.
Each side has 1 main battle tank(M1 Abrams and T-90), the US has two forms of IFV(One land and the other is amphibious, the amphibious one doesn't get bonuses from IFV upgrades), each side has one AA tank, one Fighter, one ground attack plane, one attack chopper, one scout chopper, one transport chopper, and so on.
Overall the game looks fun and in the attack/defend modes the defender usually has more stationary weapons compared to mobile ones.
Best Buy seems to have the best pre order.
The Gamestop pre order will come out for free by the end of the year as announced by DICE, the amazon pre order is just a series of dog tags, and the Best Buy preorder is 8 multiplayer skins.
Just saw this as well, so even if you want to get MW3 in the UK, get BF3 first and give it a shot. Then make the deadline and trade it in for MW3 for about a dollar.
The number one video game retailer, Gamestop is offering up Modern Warfare 3 for just 99p on the condition that you trade in your newly purchased Battlefield 3. Not a bad deal at all, certainly nothing surprising, as game trade-in deals like this aren’t new, but we’re talking about the two biggest shooters of 2011. Rivalry aside, as with any exchange there is a catch so pay attention:
I'm not saying it'll be bad. Just that I don't really care to buy ANOTHER modern-setting shooter . There's bajillions of them out there. Haven't seen anything impressive about this one.
There are a bajillion out there but none like BF3.
Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:And the more destructable, the more realistic.
Depending on the things being destroyed, a car being torn to shreds by a handgun is ridiculous but a wooden box being shot to bits with a handgun is fine.
Also, if my pistol can cause a good chunk of cement to break from a wall then that's not a good thing.
Asgeirr Darkwolf wrote:Melissa- check out the Youtube channel fro BF3. It might change your mind.
It doesn't.
It's pretty generic to me. Like other modern-setting FPS games but with better graphics, but the same gameplay styles and little to no customization as always. It's really the customization part that's annoying me. They've had HOW many boring generic modern shooters by now and they STILL don't have any real customization? I'm not sure if they're just lazy or unimaginative...
Then agan, we're unlikely to get something like R6V2's customization for a modern warfare type shooter any time soon...
More's the pity... with that kind of graphics and animation it'd look even better with more customization...
Automatically Appended Next Post: As an aside, I'm not really trying to bash it. Just saying that I'm kinda tired of the genre and wish they'd start advancing it beyond what tis' been for the past five years. And they're really not doing that... they're only refining the old, not adding something different.
I'm three quarters of the way through the campaign (got a prestreet copy of the game) and it isn't that great, although the gameplay is phenomenal. Multiplayer should be epic.
illuknisaa wrote:@Melissia Could you elaborate what you mean with no real customization.
And I thought you didn't like BF3 because you can't play as a woman (as far as I know) and it isn't scifi.
You play as a woman pilot in one mission
And customization in R6 games was annoying, because it meant a ton of people running around wearing pink and do-rags, which looked ridiculous. If I'm playing a game that strives to be more realistic than other shooters in the genre, I want it to look realistic too.
illuknisaa wrote:@Melissia Could you elaborate what you mean with no real customization.
And I thought you didn't like BF3 because you can't play as a woman (as far as I know) and it isn't scifi.
I've repeatedly and regularly said that while I've liked many games that had only male main characters, one which doesn't have a female main character or the option to play as one just isn't as good as one that does have it. It's the same as with buggy or relatively bug-free games. A game that has more bugs is not as good as one that has fewer bugs. Sure, there's some buggy games taht are awesome (V:TM Bloodlines), but for the most part this is true.
I'm not even gonna try to guess why people don't understand this, some of them seeming to refuse to understand it no matter how often I've tried to explain it. My guesses would probably break the first rule of DakkaDakka.
But basically, BF3's focus is on skills and weapon customization. Which is fine. but other games do that too, so it's really from what I can tell nothing special, and other games have probably done it better.
And customization in R6 games was annoying, because it meant a ton of people running around wearing pink and do-rags, which looked ridiculous.
That's their prerogative. It's still a better customization system than the BF, CoD, and MoH series have produced. This was one of the huge draws that APB had for me, and one of the legion of areas that Crimecraft epically failed (if you made your clothes instead of paying for them with IRL money on top of the monthly, your clothes all looked lke everyone else's and the women looked like whores). City of Heroes/Villains will always be a billion times better than WoW because of its unprecedented levels of customization by itself-- and Champions Online was quite similar in that regards, though a bit more limited in variety.
The level of customization is a very important for me in any game, the ones which have more of it are, almost by default, better than ones with none. Those that have none have to make up for its lack somewhere else (and usually don't).
Battlefield's customization focuses on things that are useful to achieve your goal and having pink uniform while hiding in a bush isn't all that useful. And battlefield isn't suppose to an rpg.
And battlefield doesn't really focus on skill or weapon customization rather on teamplay. A squad of noobs working together is always more dangerous than 4 lonewolf uber pro dudes. Weapon customization merely allows you to tackle difficulties with more varied tactics.
illuknisaa wrote:Battlefield's customization focuses on things that are useful to achieve your goal and having pink uniform while hiding in a bush isn't all that useful.
So? Let them.. Not my problem that they picked an anti-camo, makes 'em easier to snipe for me so I'm fine with that.
illuknisaa wrote:And battlefield isn't suppose to an rpg.
And that matters why oh wait no it doesn't. Many RPGs also don't have much choice or customization (almost invariably to their detriment).
illuknisaa wrote:And battlefield doesn't really focus on skill or weapon customization rather on teamplay.
... context, dude. I was talking about its customization.
illuknisaa wrote:Battlefield's customization focuses on things that are useful to achieve your goal and having pink uniform while hiding in a bush isn't all that useful.
So? Let them.. Not my problem that they picked an anti-camo, makes 'em easier to snipe for me so I'm fine with that.
illuknisaa wrote:And battlefield isn't suppose to an rpg.
And that matters why oh wait no it doesn't. Many RPGs also don't have much choice or customization (almost invariably to their detriment).
illuknisaa wrote:And battlefield doesn't really focus on skill or weapon customization rather on teamplay.
... context, dude. I was talking about its customization.
Duh.
Look she is a girl and enjoys playing dress up in her games. It really is that simple. And that's ok.
If the rest of us here at Dakka don't understand that, or prefer that developers focus on the gameplay and mechanics that are relevent to the genre, settings and over arching theme of the game that is fine also. But she is entitled to her opinion and there is no need to try and change it. The rest of us can go and enjoy BF3 for what it is (btw, the FUNCTIONAL customization of the weapons in this game is great). A great game, that looks great, plays great and has huge 64 player battles being waged over land, sea, and air. Environmental destruction that serves a purpose and is more realistic (no more knife vs concrete equals rubble). A melee system that is rewarding but not cheap. Anti-"vehicle camping" mechanics that work, without needing a currency system that unbalances the map as the game progresses. And a ton of other REFINEMENTS that were happily accepted by the community that enjoys this type of game and aren't looking for a new genre defining game that isn't BF.
Heh. I wouldn't call it "dress-up", so much as I simply like to make my characters my own rather than play someone else's idealized version.
As for your amusing all-caps emphasis, that's what all the fanboys say, but fanboys always exaggerate to make their game look better than it is, especially battlefield fanboys. Even so I have to ask-- why wouldn't it be BF if the game allowed you to change the soldier you played a bit-- make the soldier black or hispanic, change their gender, choose between some reasonable camo schemes (I never asked for pink, that was some other guy's idea), or different styles of body armor, or had perks/upgrades/etc represented as subtle visual equipment differences on the soldier's model, etc?
Unless of course you want to say that battlefield is defined by how limited and unimaginative it is.
Melissia wrote:
Then agan, we're unlikely to get something like R6V2's customization for a modern warfare type shooter any time soon...
.
Rainbow Six was always about customization, maybe not skin color at first but definitely for equipment. I have yet to see another game that gave you choices between types of ammo for a weapon, in the original PC version you could choose hollow point or FMJ for most weapons and for shotguns you had the choice of shot, slugs, or rubber batons.
I wish there was more armor choices similar to what Halo Reach had, but being able to change the overall camo color is a decent start... but MAG had more customization options than any BF game, hell Resistance had more choices in regards to customization that was just cosmetic.
Melissia wrote:Heh. I wouldn't call it "dress-up", so much as I simply like to make my characters my own rather than play someone else's idealized version.
As for your amusing all-caps emphasis, that's what all the fanboys say, but fanboys always exaggerate to make their game look better than it is, especially battlefield fanboys. Even so I have to ask-- why wouldn't it be BF if the game allowed you to change the soldier you played a bit-- make the soldier black or hispanic, change their gender, choose between some reasonable camo schemes (I never asked for pink, that was some other guy's idea), or different styles of body armor, or had perks/upgrades/etc represented as subtle visual equipment differences on the soldier's model, etc?
Unless of course you want to say that battlefield is defined by how limited and unimaginative it is.
I never said you wanted pink, but R6V gave you the ability to make your character any color and that is what happened. I'm sure the developers wouldn't have a problem with adding that much customization to the game, but you have to think about what they have already been including in the game and working on, and where there priorities are at. Since you rarely even see yourself in game, it doesn't surprise me that they didn't work hard and put a lot of effort into making many customization options for the game, especially when they probably had their hands full designing a fantastic engine for the game, massive, detailed maps and everything else that is packed into the game. I'm not trying to belittle your opinion on customization being important, but try to see it from the dev's point of view.
Okay, but when you customize your character you feel more identification with it because your avatar is now wearing what you would want to wear in that situation. Then you have everyone else seeing you as you fill them with lead, and knowing that the last thing they see in their virtual life is your special character makes it feel oh so much better.
halonachos wrote:Okay, but when you customize your character you feel more identification with it because your avatar is now wearing what you would want to wear in that situation. Then you have everyone else seeing you as you fill them with lead, and knowing that the last thing they see in their virtual life is your special character makes it feel oh so much better.
Precisely. when I kill them, it'll be ME killing them, not just nameless faceless douche #201797 who looks exactly the same as all the other nameless faceless douches. Even if I rarely see myself (which is false in a sense; I see the character's hairy man-hands all the time, and hear the character's grunty sweaty man-voice all the time-- sure you don't notice, but that's because you're a man so it's made for you specifically) in game, others will.
halonachos wrote:Okay, but when you customize your character you feel more identification with it because your avatar is now wearing what you would want to wear in that situation. Then you have everyone else seeing you as you fill them with lead, and knowing that the last thing they see in their virtual life is your special character makes it feel oh so much better.
Precisely. when I kill them, it'll be ME killing them, not just nameless faceless douche #201797 who looks exactly the same as all the other nameless faceless douches. Even if I rarely see myself (which is false in a sense; I see the character's hairy man-hands all the time, and hear the character's grunty sweaty man-voice all the time-- sure you don't notice, but that's because you're a man so it's made for you specifically) in game, others will.
Hey, I happen to grunt a lot less than most men in videogames. I know Resistance 2 had female skins as DLC later on and SOCOM 4 had female characters, but much less in terms of customization. Zipper Interactive(the people who made MAG and SOCOM 4) said that they didn't have females in MAG because they would need to create a new body structure(wanted to make it so that females and males would have different animations because they have different musculature and overall body structure and really do the difference justice) that would slow down the game(256 players at most so it would slow it down). But in games like CoD and Battlefield it should be easier to have customization and different character models.
Halo's target audience is predominately male and they made it a priority to have female skins.
In reality, it can be waved away for modern games simply because women operating within combat infantry is not a common thing. Most Special Operations units(which inevitably are the ones chosen for these kinds of games) also do not recruit women, so there's no precedent for them.
Kanluwen wrote:Halo's target audience is predominately male and they made it a priority to have female skins.
In reality, it can be waved away for modern games simply because women operating within combat infantry is not a common thing. Most Special Operations units(which inevitably are the ones chosen for these kinds of games) also do not recruit women, so there's no precedent for them.
Which is changing as time goes on.
More importantly, feth reality, video games are made to escape it, not reinforce it. Made so you can play the hero, not continue to be just another civilian. How many other facts does the game ignore for the sake of a good game?
Kanluwen wrote:Halo's target audience is predominately male and they made it a priority to have female skins.
In reality, it can be waved away for modern games simply because women operating within combat infantry is not a common thing. Most Special Operations units(which inevitably are the ones chosen for these kinds of games) also do not recruit women, so there's no precedent for them.
Which is changing as time goes on.
More importantly, feth reality, video games are made to escape it, not reinforce it. Made so you can play the hero, not continue to be just another civilian. How many other facts does the game ignore for the sake of a good game?
Why not this one?
Because T-Bagging a girl will get feminists' panties even more bunched.
Kanluwen wrote:Halo's target audience is predominately male and they made it a priority to have female skins.
In reality, it can be waved away for modern games simply because women operating within combat infantry is not a common thing. Most Special Operations units(which inevitably are the ones chosen for these kinds of games) also do not recruit women, so there's no precedent for them.
Which is changing as time goes on.
More importantly, feth reality, video games are made to escape it, not reinforce it. Made so you can play the hero, not continue to be just another civilian. How many other facts does the game ignore for the sake of a good game?
Why not this one?
Because T-Bagging a girl will get feminists' panties even more bunched.
Kanluwen wrote:Halo's target audience is predominately male and they made it a priority to have female skins.
In reality, it can be waved away for modern games simply because women operating within combat infantry is not a common thing. Most Special Operations units(which inevitably are the ones chosen for these kinds of games) also do not recruit women, so there's no precedent for them.
Which is changing as time goes on.
More importantly, feth reality, video games are made to escape it, not reinforce it. Made so you can play the hero, not continue to be just another civilian. How many other facts does the game ignore for the sake of a good game?
Why not this one?
Because T-Bagging a girl will get feminists' panties even more bunched.
Please, it's not like this is something that's never happened before. Your feminist "strawman" (Strawwoman?) didn't get in an uproar when Combat Arms did it. Or R6V2. Or the Quake and Unreal series-- multiple games over both modern and sci-fi settings.
Bah at people who don't know what feminism even is.
Kanluwen wrote:Halo's target audience is predominately male and they made it a priority to have female skins.
In reality, it can be waved away for modern games simply because women operating within combat infantry is not a common thing. Most Special Operations units(which inevitably are the ones chosen for these kinds of games) also do not recruit women, so there's no precedent for them.
Which is changing as time goes on.
More importantly, feth reality, video games are made to escape it, not reinforce it. Made so you can play the hero, not continue to be just another civilian. How many other facts does the game ignore for the sake of a good game?
Why not this one?
Because T-Bagging a girl will get feminists' panties even more bunched.
Please, it's not like this is something that's never happened before. Your feminist "strawman" (Strawwoman?) didn't get in an uproar when Combat Arms did it. Or R6V2. Or the Quake and Unreal series-- multiple games over both modern and sci-fi settings.
Bah at people who don't know what feminism even is.
Reach had Playable females. Don't remember anyone freaking out over teabagging then.
Melissia wrote:
More importantly, feth reality, video games are made to escape it, not reinforce it. Made so you can play the hero, not continue to be just another civilian. How many other facts does the game ignore for the sake of a good game?
Why not this one?
That is your definition of a good game, not everyone's...I love how battlefield makes you feel like you're actually there, whereas Halo is too far fetched for that (I LOVE Halo, but I like BF a lot too). I'm not trying to be BF fanboy and say you're wrong, but you can't write this game off as a bad game because you prefer something less realistic.
Game is realeased on the 25th -- its already the 25th in korea. The EA Origin date checker will think you are on the 25th via asia using VPN / IP proxy.
Control Panel -> Internet Options -> Connections -> LAN Settings -> Tick "Use a proxy for your LAN" -> Address: 210.107.100.251 Port: 8080
Then run origin and run the game -- it'll authenticate then simply go back and untick the proxy to get back to USA or wherever you are connecting from normally and enjoy the game.
imark789 wrote:I love how battlefield makes you feel like you're actually there
No it doesn't. You're not feeling the bullets ripping through your body. You're not feeling the heat of a desert sun as the dry air sucks the moisture out of your body. You don't feel the exhaustion after running around the map all day. You don't feel the weight of all your equipment and weapons and armor on your body you do so either. When you die you don't feel your life slipping away by the mililiter of blood. And death is merely a temporary annoyance. You don't feel the gun in your hands, you don't feel the kick of the recoil mash the stock against your shoulder, and even the motions the game goes through to provide some pale replica of recoil isn't really too accurate. Gunshot audio is not quite right, physics in general isn't quite right. Almost all of its players don't have months of harsh training and discipline instilled in them just to qualify as a basic grunt, nevermind a vehicle driver or a pilot. They don't have to physically struggle against a heavy machinegun on its mount to keep it on target, or feel the heat of an anti-tank rocket's exhaust against their face as it whizzes by their head.
The game doesn't care about realism. Battlefield 3 is an arcade shooter just like most of the other modern shooters. I'm sure you'll think I'm overreacting or defining "realistic" too specifically, but frankly if you think Battlefield 3 is "realistic" then you have low standards. But I'm fine with it not being realistic. It's okay. Realism is boring anyway.
And for the record, because you didn't bother to read my posts (as usual for BF3 fanboys), I never said it'd be a bad game. Only that it could have, and should have, been better.
Melissia wrote:Heh. I wouldn't call it "dress-up", so much as I simply like to make my characters my own rather than play someone else's idealized version.
As for your amusing all-caps emphasis, that's what all the fanboys say, but fanboys always exaggerate to make their game look better than it is, especially battlefield fanboys. Even so I have to ask-- why wouldn't it be BF if the game allowed you to change the soldier you played a bit-- make the soldier black or hispanic, change their gender, choose between some reasonable camo schemes (I never asked for pink, that was some other guy's idea), or different styles of body armor, or had perks/upgrades/etc represented as subtle visual equipment differences on the soldier's model, etc?
Unless of course you want to say that battlefield is defined by how limited and unimaginative it is.
Kanluwen wrote:Because, like Female Space Marines, Female Commandos are breaking the law!
In reality, I don't know why. Maybe they just feel it'd be silly to do or that womenfolk don't play shooters, but instead play happy fun kitten games.
Actually, females tend to be excluded from various combat roles, including special ops for several reasons. Upper body strength is one of them, however, the biggest reason believe it or not is the fact that during the menstrual cycle women tend to be at a higher risk of dehydration than their male counterparts and a dehydrated field operative is not a good field operative.
That being said, I can't see why sci-fi games don't have female skins or options and I can understand why they aren't there in simulators, but then again Battlefield and CoD aren't simulators.
That sounds like a justification rather than the 'real' reason which the Israelis put forward several years back for them withdrawing female troops from combat.
Namely, their male counterparts would take stupid risks when they saw females injured to get the females clear of danger. They even saw it during training exercises.
imark789 wrote:I love how battlefield makes you feel like you're actually there
No it doesn't. You're not feeling the bullets ripping through your body. You're not feeling the heat of a desert sun as the dry air sucks the moisture out of your body. You don't feel the exhaustion after running around the map all day. You don't feel the weight of all your equipment and weapons and armor on your body you do so either. When you die you don't feel your life slipping away by the mililiter of blood. And death is merely a temporary annoyance. You don't feel the gun in your hands, you don't feel the kick of the recoil mash the stock against your shoulder, and even the motions the game goes through to provide some pale replica of recoil isn't really too accurate. Gunshot audio is not quite right, physics in general isn't quite right. Almost all of its players don't have months of harsh training and discipline instilled in them just to qualify as a basic grunt, nevermind a vehicle driver or a pilot. They don't have to physically struggle against a heavy machinegun on its mount to keep it on target, or feel the heat of an anti-tank rocket's exhaust against their face as it whizzes by their head.
The game doesn't care about realism. Battlefield 3 is an arcade shooter just like most of the other modern shooters. I'm sure you'll think I'm overreacting or defining "realistic" too specifically, but frankly if you think Battlefield 3 is "realistic" then you have low standards. But I'm fine with it not being realistic. It's okay. Realism is boring anyway.
And for the record, because you didn't bother to read my posts (as usual for BF3 fanboys), I never said it'd be a bad game. Only that it could have, and should have, been better.
I did read your posts, you saying it was missing everything that makes it a good game implies that you think it is a bad game. And sure, it doesn't feel 100% real, but it's nice to have a game that is more grounded in reality than games like Halo and Gears of War. There is only so much realism you can put into a game and keep it playable. I'm sorry that some of us enjoy a game in a modern world with current weapons and technology. I don't see why you have to be rude because I have a differing opinion.
Kanluwen wrote:That sounds like a justification rather than the 'real' reason which the Israelis put forward several years back for them withdrawing female troops from combat.
Namely, their male counterparts would take stupid risks when they saw females injured to get the females clear of danger. They even saw it during training exercises.
Actually its a reason why women can't be in most American Special Forces. If a person is in a special forces group then the chance of finding potable water decreases and if a woman is at a higher risk of dehydration then that means they're at a higher risk of becoming weaker during the mission and then failing the mission. Besides, the military has a lot of reasons for excluding people for psychological or physical reasons... according to my friend in the USAF you can't be a fighter pilot if you have a mutilated male appendage.
Rainbow Six is closer to being one of the most realistic games, different weapons do different damage as well as being hit doing different damage. If you get hit in the leg with a pistol while wearing a medium to heavy armor kit then you'll either be incapacitated or just wounded.
imark789 wrote:I did read your posts, you saying it was missing everything that makes it a good game
I didn't say that, which is why I said you need to actually read my posts. I only listed one feature I thought it was missing, not "everything that makes a good game".
and I liked most of the Rush maps in BFBC2.
).
