Battlefield 3 - Main Thread

2011-10-02 16:02:30

#7126

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7101|Alberta, Canada

FFLink wrote:
I was told that a lot of the bugs in the beta have already been fixed, but the beta submitted was delayed so it's an older version. Something to do with Microsoft.

Not sure if it's true, but they're going to fix these things. They did it in the Alpha.

Exactly. That's what everyone seems to miss. They take the beta as being the final version of the game b/c it's so close to October 25th, causing people to automatically deny BF3 and get MW3 instead, which imo is just another version of MW2.
They won't have people falling through the map and other glitches in the final game. They will have better graphics and more destruction as well.

Last edited by Ryan (2011-10-02 16:02:41)

2011-10-02 16:05:36

#7127

DUnlimited: got any popo lolo intersting?; +1,160|6721|cuntshitlake

nothing can fix the fact that frostbite is a fundamentally broken, sluggish and terrible engine.

main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg

2011-10-02 16:09:03

#7128

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7101|Alberta, Canada

DUnlimited wrote:
nothing can fix the fact that frostbite is a fundamentally broken, sluggish and terrible engine.

Yea but I quite enjoyed BC2 on Frostbite 1.5 or whatever. I don't see what's so bad about it.

2011-10-02 16:21:26

#7129

DUnlimited: got any popo lolo intersting?; +1,160|6721|cuntshitlake

the feel of games based on most widely used engines like quake, unreal, even dice's refractor is completely different. older games like cod series, bf2, they feel light and smooth, whereas newer games like bc2, moh, blops all have this terrible, heavy feel to them. gameplay aside they just feel incomplete and raw. their graphics, netcode, physics all feel laggy and inconsistent

much of this can be explained by consolization. consoles dont need a good, sharp netcode because of how the game hosting is handled. consoles don't need sharp feel to the graphics because they are locked to 24/30 fps anyways and controller aiming doesn't require the kind of sharpness mouse aiming does etc.

It's just a shame because no matter how good they could make the gameplay, it'll still feel terrible because the core on the back is terrible.

main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg

2011-10-02 16:25:33

#7130

Superior Mind: (not macbeth); +1,755|6950

The worst part are the trees that sway like they are bobbing vertically on water.

x

2011-10-02 16:34:07

#7131

NeXuS: Shock it till ya know it; +375|6599|Atlanta, Georgia

No servers?

2011-10-02 16:36:17

#7132

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,741|6995|Cinncinatti

nope

:\

2011-10-02 16:40:59

#7133

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7101|Alberta, Canada

http://zoknowsgaming.com/2011/10/02/bat … mall-bugs/

2011-10-02 16:43:01

#7134

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6411|what

wtf servers.

maybe they are patching for an upgrade.

all servers to switch to Caspian Border

2011-10-02 16:47:46

#7135

Ryan: Member; +1,230|7101|Alberta, Canada

AussieReaper wrote:
wtf servers.

maybe they are patching for an upgrade.

all servers to switch to Caspian Border

That would be sweet. They should have made the default map Caspian right from the get go. I hope they let us play in on the console version.

2011-10-02 16:47:58

#7136

jmsprovan: Member; +18|6070|Alba

DUnlimited wrote:
the feel of games based on most widely used engines like quake, unreal, even dice's refractor is completely different. older games like cod series, bf2, they feel light and smooth, whereas newer games like bc2, moh, blops all have this terrible, heavy feel to them. gameplay aside they just feel incomplete and raw. their graphics, netcode, physics all feel laggy and inconsistent

much of this can be explained by consolization. consoles dont need a good, sharp netcode because of how the game hosting is handled. consoles don't need sharp feel to the graphics because they are locked to 24/30 fps anyways and controller aiming doesn't require the kind of sharpness mouse aiming does etc.

It's just a shame because no matter how good they could make the gameplay, it'll still feel terrible because the core on the back is terrible.

it is more to do with the current trend of realism within games than an affect of the engine, people want "realism" and that means that soldiers are not Olympic marathon runners who can turn 720 in a fraction of a second.

Although it can also be negated by shoving mouse sensitivity and yaw really high.

2011-10-02 16:49:58

#7137

I'm Jamesey: Do a Research Noob; +506|6390|Scotland!

jmsprovan wrote:
DUnlimited wrote:
the feel of games based on most widely used engines like quake, unreal, even dice's refractor is completely different. older games like cod series, bf2, they feel light and smooth, whereas newer games like bc2, moh, blops all have this terrible, heavy feel to them. gameplay aside they just feel incomplete and raw. their graphics, netcode, physics all feel laggy and inconsistent

much of this can be explained by consolization. consoles dont need a good, sharp netcode because of how the game hosting is handled. consoles don't need sharp feel to the graphics because they are locked to 24/30 fps anyways and controller aiming doesn't require the kind of sharpness mouse aiming does etc.

It's just a shame because no matter how good they could make the gameplay, it'll still feel terrible because the core on the back is terrible.
it is more to do with the current trend of realism within games than an affect of the engine, people want "realism" and that means that soldiers are not Olympic marathon runners who can turn 720 in a fraction of a second.

DUnlimited is right, it's not to do with realism, it's just sluggish, unresponsive, random and not fun to play - like most console FPS games.

2011-10-02 16:50:00

#7138

Roc18: `; +655|6049|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

"realism" = ruining what makes games fun

You see that in the form of sniper glint and sluggish gameplay in this piece of shit game.

https://g.bf3stats.com/pc/gcv8Vckg/roc18.png

BF3s.com Public Leaderboard

2011-10-02 16:50:49

#7139

DUnlimited: got any popo lolo intersting?; +1,160|6721|cuntshitlake

you are completely misunderstanding my point here. the faults i am talking about are not intentional additions, they are faults in the game engine.

main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg

2011-10-02 16:51:23

#7140

I'm Jamesey: Do a Research Noob; +506|6390|Scotland!

Roc18 wrote:
"realism" = ruining what makes games fun

You see that in the form of sniper glint and sluggish gameplay in this piece of shit game.

sniper glint is one of the best things ever to happen to a battlefield game.

2011-10-02 16:53:03

#7141

Roc18: `; +655|6049|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

I'm Jamesey wrote:
Roc18 wrote:
"realism" = ruining what makes games fun

You see that in the form of sniper glint and sluggish gameplay in this piece of shit game.
sniper glint is one of the best things ever to happen to a battlefield game.

Implying you like to be blinded constantly like you're staring into the sun.

BF3s.com Public Leaderboard

2011-10-02 16:53:59

#7142

DUnlimited: got any popo lolo intersting?; +1,160|6721|cuntshitlake

Roc18 wrote:
I'm Jamesey wrote:
Roc18 wrote:
"realism" = ruining what makes games fun

You see that in the form of sniper glint and sluggish gameplay in this piece of shit game.
sniper glint is one of the best things ever to happen to a battlefield game.
Implying you like to be blinded constantly like you're staring into the sun.

thats the retarded flashlights, not sniper glint

main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg

2011-10-02 16:55:11

#7143

Roc18: `; +655|6049|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

DUnlimited wrote:
Roc18 wrote:
I'm Jamesey wrote:

sniper glint is one of the best things ever to happen to a battlefield game.
Implying you like to be blinded constantly like you're staring into the sun.
thats the retarded flashlights, not sniper glint

It's still gay. I don't think any sensible army would use sniper scopes that give away position that easily. That's my point. They try to implement "realism" and end up fucking up the game.

BF3s.com Public Leaderboard

2011-10-02 16:55:44

#7144

AussieReaper: ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°); +5,761|6411|what

2011-10-02 16:58:53

#7145

I'm Jamesey: Do a Research Noob; +506|6390|Scotland!

Roc18 wrote:
DUnlimited wrote:
Roc18 wrote:

Implying you like to be blinded constantly like you're staring into the sun.
thats the retarded flashlights, not sniper glint
It's still gay. I don't think any sensible army would use sniper scopes that give away position that easily. That's my point. They try to implement "realism" and end up fucking up the game.

Are you stupid? glints are the only thing stopping snipers from being essentially invisible, do you want to play against invisible snipers?

2011-10-02 16:59:57

#7146

Roc18: `; +655|6049|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

I'm Jamesey wrote:
Roc18 wrote:
DUnlimited wrote:

thats the retarded flashlights, not sniper glint
It's still gay. I don't think any sensible army would use sniper scopes that give away position that easily. That's my point. They try to implement "realism" and end up fucking up the game.
Are you stupid? glints are the only thing stopping snipers from being essentially invisible, do you want to play against invisible snipers?

>Snipers
>Intended to be visible

Pick fucking one. There's something that defines snipers and that's called stealth.

BF3s.com Public Leaderboard

2011-10-02 17:01:30

#7147

I'm Jamesey: Do a Research Noob; +506|6390|Scotland!

Roc18 wrote:
I'm Jamesey wrote:
Roc18 wrote:

It's still gay. I don't think any sensible army would use sniper scopes that give away position that easily. That's my point. They try to implement "realism" and end up fucking up the game.
Are you stupid? glints are the only thing stopping snipers from being essentially invisible, do you want to play against invisible snipers?
>Snipers
>Intended to be visible

Pick fucking one. There's something that defines snipers and that's called stealth.

in gaming, there's something that defines snipers - HUGE DAMAGE

>HUGE DAMAGE
>INVISIBILITY

pick fucking one, you'd be retarded to expect both

2011-10-02 17:03:22

#7148

Roc18: `; +655|6049|PROLLLY PROLLLY PROLLLY

I'm Jamesey wrote:
Roc18 wrote:
I'm Jamesey wrote:

Are you stupid? glints are the only thing stopping snipers from being essentially invisible, do you want to play against invisible snipers?
>Snipers
>Intended to be visible

Pick fucking one. There's something that defines snipers and that's called stealth.
in gaming, there's something that defines snipers - HUGE DAMAGE

>HUGE DAMAGE
>INVISIBILITY

pick fucking one, you'd be retarded to expect both

I remember in Battlefield 2142 which was a much better fucking game had an actual CLOAKING DEVICE for Recon/Snipers.

BF3s.com Public Leaderboard

2011-10-02 17:04:32

#7149

I'm Jamesey: Do a Research Noob; +506|6390|Scotland!

Roc18 wrote:
I'm Jamesey wrote:
Roc18 wrote:

>Snipers
>Intended to be visible

Pick fucking one. There's something that defines snipers and that's called stealth.
in gaming, there's something that defines snipers - HUGE DAMAGE

>HUGE DAMAGE
>INVISIBILITY

pick fucking one, you'd be retarded to expect both
I remember in Battlefield 2142 which was a much better fucking game had an actual CLOAKING DEVICE for Recon/Snipers.

I remember battlefield 2142, it's that game nobody plays because it was shit and retarded

2011-10-02 17:05:40

#7150

13urnzz: Banned; +5,830|6755

I'm Jamesey wrote:
I remember battlefield 2142

General in a day, am i right?

BF2S Forums Battlefield 3 - Main Thread

FFLink wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

AussieReaper wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

jmsprovan wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

DUnlimited wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Roc18 wrote:

I'm Jamesey wrote:

Board footer