Battlefield 3

  • Thread starter The Bman
  • 14,126 comments
  • 540,077 views
Only in...

gen_img.php
 
1. You shouldn't buy BF3 because it's a FPS & FPS games are now old & no longer unique.
3. Modern Warfare 3.

But wait, I thought FPS games were no longer worth getting into?

LMAO at the dumbass who wrote that article.

Yep, he's an idiot. And the best thing, he goes on about Infinity Ward pumping out new DLC, keeping it 1 step ahead of the competion. I know, 5 maps costing about the price of a used game really keeps it ahead of the competion. Whereas BC2's Vietnam expansion was the same price as a Black Ops map pack, yet feels like a completely new game, has new weapons all round, and is just epic. You don't get that with First Strike, Escalation or (Whatever the extremely cheesy name for the last map pack is).
 
That's a ton of stuff in multiplayer!

Amphibious assault vehicle I saw in there sounds cool.

Now with 9 multiplayer maps do you guys think they will support it the same way as BC2 with basically 2 new maps a month?

Also sound cool co-op has unique maps, did anybody watch the coop live stream today? I, only watched maybe 2 minutes (apparently it was played on ps3) and looked pretty cool as well. Getting very excited for this game ;)
 
Again, it looks REALLY good, but I'm not going to buy it right off the bat due to the last game I bought when they first came out being really buggy.
 
McLaren
1. You shouldn't buy BF3 because it's a FPS & FPS games are now old & no longer unique.
3. Modern Warfare 3.

But wait, I thought FPS games were no longer worth getting into?

LMAO at the dumbass who wrote that article.

Wow haha lol I preordered Battlefield 3 and MW3 though lol
 
Impressive doesn't even begin to adequately describe how good this game is looking :drool:. It actually might border on looking too good, meaning the level of overall quality displayed in every facet.

I doth my cap to DICE. Much respect.
 
From Gamescom



MOTHER OF GOD it's so amazing....:drool:


It does look really really good, but the more that I look at it, the more evident it becomes, the things has to be played on PC to be played properly, 24 players with those kinds of maps will feel a bit loose, while the 64 players on PC will make the game a complete blast.

Also getting MW3, just to see how the Markov story ends, however Crysis 2 already looks better than MW3, not to mention the new effects that can be noticed from the BF3 trailer.
 
Last edited:
akiraacecombat
It does look really really good, but the more that I look at it, the more evident it becomes, the things has to be played on PC to be played properly, 24 players with those kinds of maps will feel a bit loose, while the 64 players on PC will make the game a complete blast.

While I do agree I won't be able to play the pc version. I had the alpha trial and it ran okay at best on my poor laptop. Since university looms just around the corner I don't have money to upgrade unfortunately.

They did say maps will be a bit tighter on consoles to compensate and I'd assume a few less vehicles to keep more people on the ground.

Battlelog was cool on the pc. I do wonder how they'll integrate it with consoles though.
 

I could tell that article was full of **** when I saw the website had "360" in it. :sly:

Seriously though, not trying to step on any toes here, but most xbox players, especially Americans, are going to prefer call of duty. Just they way they are. Not saying everyone is that way, it's just the trend. If you're different, good for you. The article is written by an moron though who obviously just wanted to increase page views. I'm sure it worked too.

That's a ton of stuff in multiplayer!

Amphibious assault vehicle I saw in there sounds cool.

Now with 9 multiplayer maps do you guys think they will support it the same way as BC2 with basically 2 new maps a month?

Also sound cool co-op has unique maps, did anybody watch the coop live stream today? I, only watched maybe 2 minutes (apparently it was played on ps3) and looked pretty cool as well. Getting very excited for this game ;)

Don't forget about the Karkand map pack too, coming out after the original game ships. So that's 4 more, unless those 9 count those, but I didn't see that they did. And I wouldn't count out any additional ones either.

It does look really really good, but the more that I look at it, the more evident it becomes, the things has to be played on PC to be played properly, 24 players with those kinds of maps will feel a bit loose, while the 64 players on PC will make the game a complete blast.

After looking at the stat sheets, it looks like there is a special game mode for 64 players, called "Conquest 64". Rush and the others obviously won't have 64 players, in addition to a regular Conquest mode. Still a huge advantage in addition to the step up in graphics though, DICE obviously is going big with the PC version. I wish I could afford a massive upgrade to run it like that, but I can't. I'll have to settle for it on PS3, for now.

Also getting MW3, just to see how the Markov story ends

💡

You could just...rent it :)
 
You could just...rent it :)

Nah, I will buy it, as much as MW3 is hated, there is a non deniable fact that COD games are good, they overused the core mechanic a lot, but the game is good anyway, what I like about it is the details in the battles and how their portrait war, also the scenarios(i.e. the really shocking sight of the white house being assaulted in a massive airborne operation conducted by Russia with high tech weaponry which is later counter by an EMP is something that cannot be seen so often in games, games that recycle the desert scenario over and over again).

Obviously this area was surpassed by BFBC games, but they suffer from the problem of overused scenarios, something that doesn't seem to be the case on BF3(however both games already share Paris and New York, something that Crysis 2(New York only) did first, and no love for Moscow, which will be featured in the new Ace Combat, at least someone thinks about my scenario preferences, and no fighting on LA, really?).

Anyway, have some co-op:


(PS3 presentation, a boring level for a showcase if I'm honest).
 
Nah, I will buy it, as much as MW3 is hated, there is a non deniable fact that COD games are good

I really don't want to turn this into a mw3/bf3 pissing match, but your opinion is not a "non deniable fact". It is not fact that COD games are good, it is a mass opinion. The masses also believe Bieber and Black Eyed Peas are talented though, so I never understand why that arguement is valid. :)

Anyway, hoping to see more BF3 footage this week from people playing on the show floor. I swear I read somewhere they have PS3s running. Will be interesting if we can see what the situation is with map size.
 
DwightSchrute12
. :)

Anyway, hoping to see more BF3 footage this week from people playing on the show floor. I swear I read somewhere they have PS3s running. Will be interesting if we can see what the situation is with map size.

Yes the co-op stuff today was run on ps3s. Check out gametrailers website for it.
 
DwightSchrute12
I saw that, I meant multiplayer stuff, like Conquest. :)

Oh yeah that would be nice. I do wonder about the 24 player cap but from what I've seen with DICE before and with this I have full confidence in them.
 
I could tell that article was full of **** when I saw the website had "360" in it. :sly:

Seriously though, not trying to step on any toes here, but most xbox players, especially Americans, are going to prefer call of duty. Just they way they are. Not saying everyone is that way, it's just the trend. If you're different, good for you. The article is written by an moron though who obviously just wanted to increase page views. I'm sure it worked too.

As an american I very much disagree there alot of us that dont play on the xbox at all and also a large portion of americans that either will get only battle feild or get both battlefield and MW3. How can you sit there and say Americans would just prefer MW3. I think your veiw is misimformed though we both can agree the guy that wrote the article is a moron.
 
boomee
As an american I very much disagree there alot of us that dont play on the xbox at all and also a large portion of americans that either will get only battle feild or get both battlefield and MW3. How can you sit there and say Americans would just prefer MW3. I think your veiw is misimformed though we both can agree the guy that wrote the article is a moron.

Actually I quite agree with the xbox players tend to be more Cod than Battlefield. Not so much with the American thing though.

At the time of writing this there are currently more than 2000 more players on ps3 compared to xbox (13 500- 11 350).
 
Seriously though, not trying to step on any toes here, but most xbox players, especially Americans, are going to prefer call of duty. Just they way they are. Not saying everyone is that way, it's just the trend. If you're different, good for you. The article is written by an moron though who obviously just wanted to increase page views. I'm sure it worked too.

I would agree. I think all of my friend but 3 are on PS3. EVERYONE has an Xbox, and just like CoD it is the 'cool' thing to play. Most people are influenced by all their friends playing on Xbox, so they get an Xbox, their friends play CoD, they get CoD.. only lately have most people realized that the PS3 is becoming the better system (despite the lack of updates and whatnot improving the XMB/PS3)

I would whole heartedly agree on the statement though
 
Back