Battlefield 3 Discussion Thread

Yeah commander is a must have, otherwise it isn't battlefield. But it is what it is I guess. I'll reserve judgement until the final game.

I don't recall the entire map being able to zoom out or having coordinates in BF2 either, or maybe full screen map did, I haven't played in a long time. UAV and Artillery is one thing missing, and it better be there, unless recon class does it like in BFBC2, but I haven't seen any. And it better not be restricted to recon class only. It should be something that anyone can earn a perk for. From what I've read there is a way to destroy artillery batteries like in BF2, but not sure how all that will work then if there's no commander. Maybe everyone has to wait until artillery recharges, then first come first serve whoever uses it.

Still no command rose either. I have a feeling there's a lot missing from this code that we haven't seen yet. I thought it was confirmed a comma-rose was going to be implemented.

Oh and 180 hours? Noob. I've got 600+ in BF2. lol.

Great, thanks for that +1

 

I bought BF2 at release, even though my Acer Aspire 1800 only had a crappy Pentium 4 + ATI Mobility Radeon X600.
512mb of RAM too, but after the GPU update included hypermemory ala IGP memory stealing i had to little RAM to play BF2. xD

Best MP gaming chapter of my life.
So much fun on Wake Island, Strike at Karkand and that Intel sponsored MP map they added at the "end" of the game.

 

Was there a commander in BF'42? I don't recall there being one so I find it a little odd that a lot of players are saying BF3 isn't Battlefield just because there's no commander. I wasn't even all that impressed with the feature when the BF2 demo first came out that I skipped it initially. Well not only that, but because I couldn't pilot subs or ships anymore.

 

subs? I feel like I missed something important with 1942

 

Gah! If there's any truth to this, only sniper/recon has all the toys:
Classes in Battlefield 3 multiplayer – Recon (Part 4 of 5)

" The fact sheet on BF3 lists UG Sensors, Radio Beacons, SOFLAM, and MAV Micro UAV as some of the soldier-equipped items. Some or all of these will only be usable by the Recon class."

----------------

What I don't like is this comment:

" What players should focus on the recon role?

“Lone wolf” players – that is, those who have jumped into a server on their own, will be most at home as recon.... Those who are gunning for the best K/D (kill per death) ratio will like the recon class."

Isn't that like 90% of the players out there?

 

Why give an incentive for players to lone-wolf? This is a battlefield, not a death match.

 

At least support gets the nice explosives. C4, Claymore, and the mortar. I had a fun time with the mortars in BFV and it'll be great to get to use them again.

 

I like being an engineer because I like to use the vehicles. I can't stand when a non-engineer takes a vehicle without at least an engineer with them. But so far it seems everything the engineer has is nerfed. I mean it takes forever to reload the darn RPG, it does little damage, and with the vehicle breakdown gives enemies plenty of opportunity to get out of the vehicle. It shouldn't take four or five hits from an RPG from behind to blow up a tank, at least it takes me that much. From behind 2, maybe 3.

 

The youtube video is from a newer build than the beta, so you see something not yet implemented in the beta, like this one.

 

I see thanks a lot for the clarification.

 

After about 20 minutes of playing the beta, the game minimized to the taskbar and wouldn't come back up, forcing me to do a Microsoft salute. Does this happen to anyone else?

 

Oh yeah, submarines were the best! I thought all the naval combat in BF 1942 was just plain epic, especially the Omaha Beach map where the Allies had one destroyer/frigate thing that just could reign death on those damn tigers and panzers camping the left and right ramps on the beach. And of course all the friendly fire casualties due to poor spotting. So much fun!

Are there going to be any player-controlled ships in BF3? Or will it just be land vehicles, jets and helicopters?

 

Not that specifically but have had lots of weird things happen. Game just dumping to desktop on me for no apparent reason. Game starting then locking up.

 

Damn, FSX helped me A LOT with jets... I'm unstoppable

Unless there is a very good lock on made by a pro, no one can kill me

 

Playing chicken with a Tank.

Superman lives!

Also, there is some speculation that BF3 WILL be coming to Steam:
*Rumor: EA & Valve in late stage talks to get BF3 on Steam - Steam Users' Forums

 

Challenge accepted!

 

Plane physics are weird. I saw a jet flying at 5MPH upside down while strafing and slowly stalling to the ground. Was hilarious!

 

Yes very weird. I ran across an enemy aircraft stuck between a couple rocks and in the forest, I was like . I repaired it, hopped in, and was able to take off lol. Except there must be some safeguard against stealing enemy jets because as soon as I took off it gave me the ten second "out of range" timer, but it got me to my point a lot quicker and ejected just before timer ran out and chuted in, lol.

 

I like the turbulence I get in the jets. Even though it sounds like being in a back of moving truck, its a nice touch of realism.

 

The helicopters are a terrible mess in this game. I would go as far as to say they are worse than BC2. They are basically big, slow and fragile targets for anti-air and ground fire. You can't get close to anything before being shot down. You can't even fly high enough not to be an easy target, cause the gunners camera has no zoom, night vision or thermal vision to see and engage anything from a distance. DICE just had to gimp every single vehicle by taking away the standard features away and make them unlocks instead. I mean since when are flares (countermeasures) a luxury?

 

Gah, now I'm getting dumped every time I start a game. Can't go even a few minutes without the game just closing out...

 

Its true that BF1942 had neither squads nor a commander, but that game came out 9 years ago so one would think that gameplay in a game now would be AT LEAST as advanced, not less so. While we do have squads, the BF3 maps so far are far more linear and don't offer as rich of a gameplay experience as BF1942 did.

Also, there are likely going to be NO Conquest: assault maps (like omaha beach, battle of the bulge, and wake island); this type of conquest map was much more fun than the large maps with 2 uncaps, which were honestly just too big to have any sort of intense battle going on; it always ended up being people wandering around capturing points.

 

One ... More ... Day !!!

 

Not sure about calling a game less advanced just because the commander's not implemented. It's a nice feature to have, but my experience with it hasn't been all that good where I would rarely have a good commander so I'm not going to miss it. I might even say they took a step back with BF2 for not having much in the way of ocean focused maps like Midway and Guadalcanal.

As far as conquest assault maps, Wake Island will be included, at least as long as you pre-ordered. Still disappointed that the ship couldn't be moved around in BF2 Wake Island.

 

Then at least a week of agonizing patience.

 

A week of hoping that DICE wouldn't further ruin the game and fix the glaring issues that everybody identifies with it... oh, lets just start with SQUADS!

 

Augh, it's over and I was just getting to love the mobile AA!

 

You mean two weeks... October 25. Plus I ordered from Newegg so will probably have to wait for my boxed copy to arrive.

 

Well sir I bow down before thee. Unfortunately, like the young fool I was, tried balancing school + gaming.

Its quite clear that gaming wins every time. Even if you're close to failing.





...especially if you're close to failing

 

LOL. I hear ya. I was fortunate that I played it when I was out of college, was established in a career, and married with no kids. Time was aplenty. Other than mowing the lawn and watching a chic flick from time to time with the old lady, gaming was aplenty with little else at risk!

 

YOU KNOW WHAT?! I was trying to give myself the impression of waiting less! The truth hurts. :cry:

/sarcasm

 

Well the Caspian Border map was just what I needed to restore my faith that BF3 will be great cause I was really hating the Metro Rush map.

I experienced to huge bugs or severe lag.
Vehicles were a blast, I loved the tanks, choppers, and planes.

All in all I was very satisfied with the gameplay and performance. Game looked beautiful on my PC even with severely dumbed down settings. We did a side by side comparison (metro) with the beta on Xbox 360 and the PC totally trashed the 360 version graphically (I mean not even close).

My rig is a desktop AMD Athlon x4 620 with a old ati 4670. If I lower res to 1366x768 I can get it to run liquid smooth.

 

Hey guys I got a question about 2nd gen i7 (maybe all i7 altogether)

The turboboost function kicks in when its running an intensive program right? I read somewhere that it only kicks 2 cores to 2.9ghz

Now I know BF3 Beta recommends quad core, so with turbo boost on, does it disable 2 cores to run the remaining 2 @ 2.9ghz? If thats the case wouldnt it be better to have 4 cores at 2.0ghz

Something tells me Im wrong but would like clarification. Also the game releases in like a week or two. I dont see how they can drastically improve the game while still reaching the deadline (production should end a day or 2 before the shipment...or 3 days)

 

I can't seem to join any Caspian Border servers. When I do, the map loads and then it just stays at a black screen. I can hear things happening in the game, but I never get to the spawn menu.

 

I get that frequently, or it will just dump to desktop.

In any case can't even load up the battlelog page. Is it down for good now? Would it hurt them to let us play for two weeks until final version is released? Please?

 

Turboboost function kicks in depending on how many cores are 100% in use and the boost level is adjusted accordingly.

Not sure about your i7, but on mine the boost works like this:

3-4 cores fully active I get a turbo boost of 133mhz bringing me from 1.6ghz -1.73ghz @ stock.

2 cores it boosts by 800mhz so from 1.6ghz to 2.4ghz.

Finally on one core it boosts to 2.8ghz which is 1.2GHZ increase.

The other cores are not disabled they are just set idle.

Beta ended today so can't play till the 25th, it was an older build and they kinda botched the beta IMO. I am just looking forward to the 25th now!

 

in your case, when you mean idle, are they below the standard speed (1.6ghz)? If thats the case wouldnt it to be better (well for BF3 at least) for all 4 cores at 1.7ghz than two cores at 2.4ghz and the remaining two idle?

@BF3 topic; its 2 weeks till live (less for shipping and all that) .____. I mean dont games release beta then release the final release months after the beta?

This is the first time for me that an OB ends then less than a month a final release comes out.

 

Given the problems there are a the moment, this looks like it's going to be a laugh when it releases. All I can say is that I'm glad I didn't invest in BF3 or MW3.

 

Depends on how many processors the game is designed to work with and how evenly the threading is done. Yes, running all cores gives you the most computational potential. If you are running an intensive program that can only run on 2 cores, you might be better off with only running 2 cores at a higher rate, rather than keep all 4 active at a slower rate. Before turboboost, there was sometimes an issue that quad core processors would often be slower than their dual core counterparts because the dual core might be clocked somewhat higher. Turboboost resolves that issue, and it works behind the scenes to make it's decisions, so you don't need to worry about it.

 

Unfortunately if it releases just barely above "unplayable" it will be par for the course with other AAA game releases lately... I really can't recall a major, anticipated game that released bug free or didn't require a major patch within the first month of release.

Still torn on preordering, too many variables. It comes down to weighing karkand and getting in on the hype early vs possible bugs, possible steam release, possible sales near the xmas break.

 

I'm rather confident the release version will run a lot smoother with fewer bugs than the BETA which was a 1-2 month old build according to DICE.

Only two weeks left, so I'm guessing the game has either gone gold already or will be very soon.

 

by that notion my i7 sandy turbos to 2.6 (dual core i presume ) but bf3 is geared towards quad cores, so why is it or why is the i7 thinking its better to run as dual?

 

either way, i think a i7 2760qm will be ideal for this game

 

VGCharts pre-order North America for 10/8 week:

Americas Pre-Order Chart - VGChartz

Battlefield 3 has gained 164,148 during only one week. Also MW3 is going very well with pre-orders, gaining 208,092 more pre-orders in the same period.

It will be a big battle between EA and Activision this year.

 

There could be a patch ready just in time for the release in every case, if they were not able to gone gold with the fixed build.

 

The battle will go towards Activision unless EA & Dice can super tweak the console versions. Dont get me wrong, I love BF3 but the requirements to run them are hefty. And its watered down on consoles.

Activision will most likely win because how fluid the gameplay is on console as well as PC

 

I agree with you about consoles, I suppose Activision will be able to sell more on console. However, on PC, I don't think there will be a battle. DICE will win easily.

Notice that these are only NA pre-orders data, I would like to know how well is going BF3 in Europe instead.

 

I agree, they should've just left the controls the way they are on BC2. I think it was perfect, only a few people got the hang of it, and once u mastered it, its super easy to fly. Don't get me wrong, i can fly the heli's(somewhat) on BF3 but it just doesn't feel right...

 

Here's some Jihad Jeep gameplay..

<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/clDpZIaU3-Q?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/clDpZIaU3-Q?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width='640' height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

 

Yeah I want this game, and I want to play with 64 players, but I'm not really sure, I have an ATI 6750 m+ i7 2720 and I don't know what settings I can play it on. I'm not going to play at 1080p but I'm thinking 900p. I wouldn't mind gaming on my 1080p TV, but I doubt my computer can push out 1080p graphics for BF3.

I would rather not get it on console with only 24 players, in that case I would only get MW3 (for console).

From what I know about Skyrim I should probably get that on PC, but this game I don't know how well I can run it with my stats. Otherwise I would probably pre-order.