Battlefield 3 - short teaser trailer

Looks great from what little you can see!

GAMEPLAY DEBUT! - EA

 

YouTube - Battlefield 3 - Gameplay Trailer - Slowed Down

slow mo

 

good luck to anyone running this with anything less than a cray supercomputer. heh, everyone and their whining about console ports, thanks to you this game is will be out of reach for the average gamer and only the silver spoon enthusiast will dish out cash just to enjoy it how it was meant to be. Console ports are good, they don't push the envelope beyond the masses to enjoy, just take Crysis 2 for instance, it looks just fine even better than Crysis 1 and runs at 30 fps in DX9.

Anyway the vid looks to be single player footage, I think my GTX 460m is gonna choke even on low settings, and I ain't even gonna get into my i5 :/ special PC attention, heh

 

Wow, at 0:12, the arm of the soldier (on the left of the screen) is REALLY ugly :O

 

I'm sure it'll be fine. This game is still cross platform. It will probably run about as good as anything else at similar levels of graphic detail. It may have a higher graphics ceiling than most other AAA titles, which doesn't affect you negatively at all.

 

btw, I hate trailers that can give a person seizure.

 

Is it me or does it resemble Modern Warfare so much it is not funny anymore?
The view looks narrower(more action FPS oriented and not surrounding teammates oriented like in BF2) and give me back my ironsights!
Seriously I gonna hold my money back until I can confirm it retains the Battlefield 2 environment.
The enemies silhouette looks so big and easy to hit...

 

I hope it won't copy the "pull me up" moments from COD, Medal of Honor copied it so much time in it's Singler Player that after the 4th time I couldn't stop laughing

 

"Pull me up moments" should stay in the movies where it belongs, keep them out of my games.

 

Dragging your team to safety...
But MOH Pacific assault had it all..isn't it?
You had to carry wounded players to safety and have medics fix him...
Most of my friends are having that feature as a spotlight...

 

The only things that seem to have a huge performance impact are Parallax and Displacement mapping and Volumetric Lightning and Shadows. I guess I will need to play in Med-low... We will find out in July-August

BUT, if we disable those, the performance might be the same as BC2. ( tho I won't disable vol. Lights tesselation, but parallax and displ. map will be off. Also, textures will be maxed. At 1080p )

 

I know it looks like MOH, MW2, wtv wtv, and I'm not a fan of that, but that was still AWESOME!

 

That appears to be single player. Until we see real verified MP footage we shouldn't jump to conclusions of the CODness of it.
I am waiting until I see some vehicles before I pass judgment on how much like MW it is...

 

I doubt that will be true.

 

welp....about time i build a desktop

 

Dude, chill... Relax!

This ain't be THAT demanding; the specs will be a little higher than Crysis 2, but still, it will be accessible. I think you will NOT need a supercomputer like in Crysis 1, because, they use Deferred rendering (BF3 and C2) opposed to the forward rendering in Crysis 1. I think a MRHD 5870 will play at 50s @ 1080p, med settings. I will sit around 30s @ 1080p med-low ( except textures on high ) -> I have a MRHD 5730.

 

Recommended requirement will be SLI GTX 580's from the looks of that. lol. My 5650 would explode.

 

What will happen is there will be the dx10/dx9 version, which is the version that will look similar to the console's dx9 version of bf3, just that ea isnt supporting dx9 pc side so it will be dx10, then the "dx11" version will have slight tesselation, like in AvP, a hardly noticable differince, they aren't going out of their way to have 2 seperate builds of BF3 , one for dx9/10 and then a vastly superior dx11, its just not going to happen.

 

There will be NO DX9 version so if you're running XP then you CANT play this game

 

There is no DX9 for PC! Please re-read my post because I said the PS3 and XBOX360 version will be of DX9 specification, So there is technically a dx9 version, which means the base game, even the DX10 version will all be dx9 assets, and the dx11 will have tacked on tesselation.

 

Because Direct X obviously doesn't work in such a way that an engine can be designed for DX11 and ported down to DX10, and the consoles clearly use an API identical DX9. Did you watch the trailer or read any of the news on the game, or are you just one of those skeptics still convinced that this will be another console port?

 

Im not a skeptic but a realist and I've read all the news so far as im interested in the game, regardless of its classifaction, the game will have very little different between pc and console, which is the point im trying to make. EA won't spend the time or money doing it and any hopes that they will is foolish, this is a business, not a fanboy elitist club. That all said im sure it will be a fun game as long as it keeps away from the CoD persona.

 

@daranik ohhh ok but I think it was a DX11 version with compatibility with 10.

Anyway






[

oh This are actual gameplay footage and not CG

 

Actually, you are skeptical. You're skeptical that DICE is really putting attention into making the PC version unique. In fact, you're saying that they outright lied about the engine being primarily made for DX11.

If the 360 can produce graphics like that, I'm never touching PC gaming again.

 

how's you post this? I can't even imbedded a video from youtube. Can someone tell me how to imbed a video or gif on this forum without just linking? I used to be able to, but for some reason it's not letting me anymore.

And as far as the animated pics and graphics of BF3, we are finally starting to see photorealistic interactive graphics that trump Toy Story animation from years past. We are really starting to see 21st century tech. I remember as a kid we used to play with plastic toy soldiers, the kids now days when they get older will be interacting in holographic environments, with not just visuals but all 5 senses.

 

Oh boy, this post again.

Wasn't crapping up the last Battlefield 3 thread with your baseless speculation enough? Also, "Console ports are good", lololol...joke of the year, people, you saw it here first.

People like you are the reason companies like Activision can get away with feeding PC gamers the same overpriced shovelware year after year.

Youtube vids should still embed with the HTML embedding code available on Youtube itself. As for animated GIF's, just use tags like any other image.

Anyway, I really don't have anything to say other than it looks awesome. I could say I'm excited, but I've already mentioned that in plenty of other BF3 threads.

 

Well maybe you don't mind playing in low settings with framerates that still dip below 20 fps, but most people get irritated not being able to run a game at max settings with fluid smooth animation, and again it's because developers push the envelope far beyond what mainstream hardware can sustain, not because they have to, but because foolish people don't know what they ask for when they say "oh no not another console port".

If the developers were to use the specs of the console hardware as the base requirement, and then add options to enable extra graphical effects upon that, the majority of PC owners would be able to run the game fluidly and with great looking graphics, but since everyone was crying that "Dice feeds us bogus shovelware console ports" they decide not to even support DX9 and say "ok we'll program something beyond it's time in software AND hardware, so they'll have to buy the best most modern DX11 cards and quad CPUs that are very expensive and what most people can't afford in this financial crisis, so they stop whining that we gave them another console port."

 

You have no idea how it will run because it hasn't been released yet. All your arguments are 100% speculation. Nobody except the DICE devs have played it, and I'm fairly certain you're not a DICE employee.

Also, you don't need a DX11 card; it's confirmed to run in DX10 as well.

As far as I'm concerned, ditching XP and DX9 is one of the best decisions any developer has made in a long time, but that's for another thread.

 

+1

I will assume, because it is running on a newer version of the Frostbite engine, that a quadcore is a must -- as it was in bad company 2 if one wanted more than low-med settings.

That being said, it certainly looks good. But I would wager (meaning pure speculation) from the images that it really is not that much more advanced than BC2. Also the SP environment appears, in the clip anyway, to be corridor'd which will be less taxing than a open environment.

MP will be a different story, and will be the only story I will be interested in. But I do believe that a high end machine, running in DX11 (dx11 runs quite a bit faster on my desktop -- Galaxy 460 gtx OC to 470 levels) will be able to max it rather easily.

speculation, speculation, speculation.

 

I'll guarantee that when it's released BF3 won't be playable on current $1000-$1500 model laptops at max settings at anything beyond 30 fps. Maybe some high end desktops or sli equiped notebooks that cost $3000 might barely manage to attain 30 fps, but again, it'll be just as demanding as the other DX11 game Metro 2033.

Maybe a year after it's release will we see laptops at reasonable prices that could possibly attain a playable 30fps.

Upgrading hardware doesn't have to be a prerequiste to having next generation graphics, game developers have already shown better graphics can be done on ancient console hardware without the need for upgrading.

The only thing that's making PC gaming die is because instead of using all the potential of current software programming technology they by pass it and move forward with newer tech that needs more powerful hardware, it just becomes marketing so people spend spend spend on the latest and greatest hardware.

 

At the end of the trailer you can hear the guy yell "Kesafat" which I believe means "piece of sh*t" or "son of a b..." in Farsi/Persian, so looks like the game might be taking place in Iran or at least the new MEC will consist of people who speak Farsi instead of Arabic.

 

I honestly don't care if the graphics improve over BFBC2 (they surely won't on my 5650m); I care more about the GAMEPLAY, and if it is worthy of the Battlefield name.

 

Farsi is also indicative of Afghanistan. I can see that; lots of open space for air and tank battles, but also smaller villages for the infantry battles. I'm picturing a flatter and bigger Heavy Metal.

 

Thoughts


I like that it showed the animation of the Gun Dropping to be FLuid and not the "instant drop" to the ground FPS games have.

Also looks like Blood was sprayed through the screen(eye sight) of the player which adds realism as well.

Hope to see bloodied clothes as well



The Lighting and Shadow are astounding!!!!!!

Also the Palm tree in the center seems to move because of the explosion

 

I think they removed the default cross hair completely, you need to scope to aim.

 

CANNOT WAIT FOR THIS

I gotta make sure I'm level 50 in BC2 otherwise I'll feel like I haven't finished it...

Wonder if this will be the first thing to start challenging my 5870 Xfire

 

Hey folks, just a quick plea, but I really want to hear more opinions on the trailer, so keep it civil so the thread doesn't get shut down. Everyone is entitled to their opinions, no need to start throwing threats around over freaking game requirements!

 

Just noticed this



The detail they putted in the sunlight reflection on the water is astounding!!!!

 

Looks like there're some confirmable weapons/accessories - M-16, AT4, EOTech Holo Sight, and a scope. Hope exiting a vehicle is the same as that part of the teaser for MP.

 

[

I'll bet they cut these ingame footages real short and gave us only glimpses, because if they played a 30 second footage of firefights and looking around 360 degrees, we would witness some horrendous slow down and choppiness with everything going onscreen and being calculated by AMD's highend graphic cards in crossfire. For real.

 

Deferred lighting FTW More quality at less system resources

 

I deleted a bunch of posts . . . let's not argue about the possible performance of some game that has not even been released yet. There are no facts at this point.

As someone noted, stick to talking about the trailer and what you think of it.

 

Someone saw this.

Artifact on the gun

 

I don't believe those are actual in-game footage.

 

back on topic, Middle east AGAIN!!! They might aswell start pumping out world war 1 and 2 again. Why can't they think up something slightly original, doesn't have to be much, just enough to get away from middle east.

 

believe it.

A developer confirmed it was all ingame

 

that really sounds legit. /s

I'd love to be wrong.

 

Well if you couldnt trust a developer saying it was ingame then who can you trust?

 

TBF it is most likely prescripted 'easy to make look good' moments from the single player, but it still does look good...

 

Its all about lighting now a days, in game models have been great for years, but lighting can make or break the believability, that and suddle things like motion blur, tesselation, can make small noticable differences. We can finally move on from bump mapping I hope.