Battlefield 3: Multiplatform.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/110/1109662p1.html

http://up-ship.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/fffuuu.gif

[Romeo]

Well, that doesn't surprise me at all, given that Battlefield 2 was on the 360 as well...

[Pretentious Old Man.]

Yeah, but PC was always the lead platform. DICE's "deal" was that Bad Company was designed for consoles, and as a result was either non-existant or not brilliantly ported for the PC, and that the proper franchise was for the PC.

I wouldn't mind if the PC was the lead development platform for 3, but really and truly, how likely is that shaping up to be?

[Jerion]

Meh. Doesn't bother me.

It'll be an evolution of BF 2 with destruction and more class cross-pollination. And hey, I'll have a beta invite!

[Pretentious Old Man.]

Meh. Doesn't bother me.

It'll be an evolution of BF 2 with destruction and more class cross-pollination. And hey, I'll have a beta invite!

Probably fewer classes, only 12 vs 12 battles, smaller maps, worse vehicle physics...

Basically, I suspect that it'll be the next bad company. Current-gen consoles can't handle 64 player battlefield style combat. (Don't bring up MAG, that's just shuddersome...)

I've not given up all hope, but I know in my heart of hearts that Bad Company 3 is what we're getting here. Also, pound to a penny it won't be moddable.

[Romeo]

Probably fewer classes, only 12 vs 12 battles, smaller maps, worse vehicle physics...

Basically, I suspect that it'll be the next bad company. Current-gen consoles can't handle 64 player battlefield style combat. (Don't bring up MAG, that's just shuddersome...)

I've not given up all hope, but I know in my heart of hearts that Bad Company 3 is what we're getting here. Also, pound to a penny it won't be moddable.
I will admit, I don't like what they've done. Console players, of which I am a part of, already have Bad Company (Which is a great game, not saying anything ill of it). You PC players do deserve a bit of love, especially concerning while Battlefield 2 was on other platforms, as someone pointed out, the Battlefield series has always been PC-first (Bad Company excluded, of course).

Oh well, I've got my fingers crossed for you, buddy.

[Shralla]

I don't get all the Bad Company hate. Bad Company 2 is phenomenal, AND IS BETTER ON PC THAN ON CONSOLES, so I really don't understand what you guys are crying about.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

I don't get all the Bad Company hate. Bad Company 2 is phenomenal, AND IS BETTER ON PC THAN ON CONSOLES, so I really don't understand what you guys are crying about.

Rome: Total War is also a phenomenal game. I wouldn't want that sold as Battlefield 3 either.

Oh, and thanks Romeo. I hope they find a way to give you console guys 64 player multi without breaking the internet! :)

[Romeo]

Rome: Total War is also a phenomenal game. I wouldn't want that sold as Battlefield 3 either.

Oh, and thanks Romeo. I hope they find a way to give you console guys 64 player multi without breaking the internet! :)
They need to divide by zero.

[Shralla]

Rome: Total War is also a phenomenal game. I wouldn't want that sold as Battlefield 3 either.

Right, because there are no similarities between Bad Company and any previous entry into the series. You're just nitpicking so you feel you have something to complain about. I know I bandy about the term "negative Nancy" a lot, but that's exactly what you are, especially since you think that 12v12 is even remotely a possibility for a player cap, given that Bad Company 2 had a cap of 32 players.

[Ashpolt]

Right, because there are no similarities between Bad Company and any previous entry into the series. You're just nitpicking so you feel you have something to complain about. I know I bandy about the term "negative Nancy" a lot, but that's exactly what you are, especially since you think that 12v12 is even remotely a possibility for a player cap, given that Bad Company 2 had a cap of 32 players.

...Which is only 16v16, not far off what POM said, and still only half the capacity of the 64 player matches that previous PC-only Battlefield games have provided.

[Romeo]

Right, because there are no similarities between Bad Company and any previous entry into the series. You're just nitpicking so you feel you have something to complain about. I know I bandy about the term "negative Nancy" a lot, but that's exactly what you are, especially since you think that 12v12 is even remotely a possibility for a player cap, given that Bad Company 2 had a cap of 32 players.
You'll notice he says he doesn't hate BC, he just wants Battlefield to stay like Battlefield. And truth be told, I'm with the majority when I say: He's right.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

Right, because there are no similarities between Bad Company and any previous entry into the series. You're just nitpicking so you feel you have something to complain about. I know I bandy about the term "negative Nancy" a lot, but that's exactly what you are, especially since you think that 12v12 is even remotely a possibility for a player cap, given that Bad Company 2 had a cap of 32 players.

I didn't say there were no similarities. I said they were not the same.

And no, I'm sorry I'm going to stick with this whether you approve or not, Bad Company 2 is virtually nothing like the old Battlefields. We (the BF community) have waited for 5 years for that. There's more to a Battlefield game than the theme and some classes.

I would not object, incidentally, to a BC3. BC2 is a wonderful game. But. It. Is. Not. Battlefield.

[Fluffis]

I would not object, incidentally, to a BC3. BC2 is a wonderful game. But. It. Is. Not. Battlefield.

Amen, Hallelujah and various other religious exclamations. There is just no argument against it.

[Romeo]

Case closed.

[Shralla]

Case closed, because clearly the the most elitist of the fanboys get to determine whether or not a game "actually belongs" to a certain series or not, regardless of the name on the box.

[Romeo]

Case closed, because clearly the the most elitist of the fanboys get to determine whether or not a game "actually belongs" to a certain series or not, regardless of the name on the box.
I fail to see why you're upset. We console players already have our game: Bad Company. And what a wonderful game it is, and very console-centric. I feel bad for the PC players though, who are now slowly losing their exclusive Battlefield.

[Jerion]

I fail to see why you're upset. We console players already have our game: Bad Company. And what a wonderful game it is, and very console-centric. I feel bad for the PC players though, who are now slowly losing their exclusive Battlefield.

I admit I've never encountered 128 player battles. My first foray into the BF franchise was with 2142, and that maxed out at 64 player. I'd be fine if BF3 had that cap, but it better have the huge maps again. To hell with console limitations, I want my big maps and large-scale general tactics! Commander mode! Jets! BC2 is fun, but it's a BF-MW hybrid. That's not what I want from BF3.

I hope they've spent time optimizing Frostbite to support *much* larger levels than BC2 had. Most of the play areas in that game aren't even in the same league as full-size levels from 2142. Highway Tampa, Bridge at Remagen or Suez Canal dwarf them all. Geez, I'm almost drooling over the idea of city map like Remagen with Destruction.

[Romeo]

I gotta say, my favourite map of all-time is still "Bridge Too Far" from Battlefield 2. I just loved it, for no apparent reason. But yes, to hell with console limitations, BF3 should be at the very least focused on what the PC can do, rather than what the consoles can handle. Then scale back the console ports after. I'm still surprised it's on consoles, seeing as how they already have BC (Which I recognize is not the same, but it's close enough as far as I'm worried. We consolers are contented by it. You guys need your own one now. lol)

[FrankCSIS]

because clearly the the most elitist of the fanboys get to determine whether or not a game "actually belongs" to a certain series or not, regardless of the name on the box.

That's like saying checkers is fine, but Stern-Halma is more fun, and therefor there is no harm in optimising the next checkers game released by adopting the board of Stern-Halma and many of its rules, and yet label it as checkers on the box.

If one intends on continuing a series, he should first and foremost worry about optimising the series' characteristic features and solve previous entries' problems, not adopt styles of other similar familiar games to become its direct competitor. That's how variety dies. Defending variety has little to do with elitism.

[Romeo]

That's like saying checkers is fine, but Stern-Halma is more fun, and therefor there is no harm in optimising the next checkers game released by adopting the board of Stern-Halma and many of its rules, and yet label it as checkers on the box.

If one intends on continuing a series, he should first and foremost worry about optimising the series' characteristic features and solve previous entries' problems, not adopt styles of other similar familiar games to become its direct competitor. That's how variety dies. Defending variety has little to do with elitism.
...I don't know... That sounds like something an elistist would say... :rolleyes:

[FrankCSIS]

Variety, a form of representation, is more populist than elitist, I'd tend to say.

[Romeo]

Variety, a form of representation, is more populist than elitist, I'd tend to say.
Pfft, something else an elistist would claim, you elitist. :lol:

[Jerion]

You can't walk away from this one, Frank. Just embrace it. :rasp:

[FrankCSIS]

Alright I'm unmasked :(

Bow down to my supreme logic, inferior beings, for I hold the truth about gaming, and everything else that matters.

[Romeo]

Alright I'm unmasked :(

Bow down to my supreme logic, inferior beings, for I hold the truth about gaming, and everything else that matters.
Are you calling me a n00b? Now I'm sad face. :lol:

[Pretentious Old Man.]

Alright I'm unmasked :(

Bow down to my supreme logic, inferior beings, for I hold the truth about gaming, and everything else that matters.

What's the best kind of cheddar cheese?

a.) Mild
b.) Medium
c.) Mature
d.) Extra-Mature

There can only be one answer. Give it correctly or die.

[Jerion]

What's the best kind of cheddar cheese?

a.) Mild
b.) Medium
c.) Mature
d.) Extra-Mature

There can only be one answer. Give it correctly or die.

Cabot Old School Cheddar. Aged 5 years! Mmmm!

[Romeo]

Cheesy death awaits the ignorent. =P

[FrankCSIS]

c.) Mature

I thought about extra mature for a second, but it becomes too unstable under heat, which shows it's just past the point of perfection, and so lacks the necessary moisture under the teeth at room temperature.

[Romeo]

I thought about extra mature for a second, but it becomes too unstable under heat, which shows it's just past the point of perfection, and so lacks the necessary moisture under the teeth at room temperature.
LOL!!! HOW DID WE GET TO THIS DISCUSSION?!?!

Ah, Battlefield. Bringing ridiculous discussions to fruition with your terrible decisions... :p

[FrankCSIS]

Hey, I'm an elitist to the core, man, all the way down to the age of my cheddar.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

I thought about extra mature for a second, but it becomes too unstable under heat, which shows it's just past the point of perfection, and so lacks the necessary moisture under the teeth at room temperature.

Thank you, sir, that is the correct answer.

[Romeo]

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS CONVERSATION? lol

[Fluffis]

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS CONVERSATION? lol

It needs more cowbell!

http://lesombre.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/More-Cowbell.gif

[Romeo]

LOL!!! Fluffis, that was the most epic post, in the history of everything.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

It needs more cowbell!

http://lesombre.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/More-Cowbell.gif

Mmmm...cows...


....cows make cheese...cheese...

Continue.

[Dead-Eye]

I'm quit a fan of BF:BC 2. My only problem with that game is the lake of a prone key.

However I always felt that Battlefield was never hardcore enough for it's self. In 1942 the instruments in the plain don't work. In the submarine you can drown if you stay down for longer then 3 minutes. And ship to ship combat never really worked.

Personally I would like to see a game that included a combination of Flight Sim, Submarine Sim, Ship Sim and FPS to create a more realistic environment for players. Imagen the instruments on plans actually working and the ability for submarine skippers to actually use torpedo solutions to hit targets (over the blind fire that was featured in 1942) That to me would be fun because smart players who don't mind the complicated controls of simulators would drive the ships and fly the plans while the less technically incline would just jump on a patrol boat and shoot their way to victory. Something for everyone no?

[Fluffis]

Mmmm...cows...


....cows make cheese...cheese...

Continue.

You Krafty bastard. I was hoping this could Brie an open thread, and Camembert to say Halloumi. Asiago' it wrong. I'll just Stilton out of here.

[Jerion]

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/14494-battlefield-3-leaving-dx-9-behind-frostbite-2-engine-good-news-for-pc-gamers/

Good Stuff.

[Pretentious Old Man.]

I'm quit a fan of BF:BC 2. My only problem with that game is the lake of a prone key.

However I always felt that Battlefield was never hardcore enough for it's self. In 1942 the instruments in the plain don't work. In the submarine you can drown if you stay down for longer then 3 minutes. And ship to ship combat never really worked.

Personally I would like to see a game that included a combination of Flight Sim, Submarine Sim, Ship Sim and FPS to create a more realistic environment for players. Imagen the instruments on plans actually working and the ability for submarine skippers to actually use torpedo solutions to hit targets (over the blind fire that was featured in 1942) That to me would be fun because smart players who don't mind the complicated controls of simulators would drive the ships and fly the plans while the less technically incline would just jump on a patrol boat and shoot their way to victory. Something for everyone no?

If I may condense your thoughts: a game as radical as Operation Flashpoint was in 2001, in 2010. With that level of detail on all the systems.

I completely agree. Sadly, never gonna happen. The 12 year olds may get bored.

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/14494-battlefield-3-leaving-dx-9-behind-frostbite-2-engine-good-news-for-pc-gamers/

Good Stuff.

Thanks, Mr. K. That at least is reassuring.

[Jerion]

If I may condense your thoughts: a game as radical as Operation Flashpoint was in 2001, in 2010. With that level of detail on all the systems.

I completely agree. Sadly, never gonna happen. The 12 year olds may get bored.


That level of detail would be pretty cool, it's another direction from where I'd like BF to go.

Basically, while that level of sim detail (right down to accurate and responsive instruments in the jets) would be great, I'd like the maps to get way more intricate. No more "surface outdoors only" play- if there's a mountain fortress base (http://img.hexus.net/v2/gaming/screenshots_pc/battle/battle5_large.jpg), then there should be an expansive area underground. If there are city buildings (http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b163/Tholozor/CF2142%20Tournament/80ae173c.png), then the option should be there to climb up to the upper floors and walk around. If there's a very pesky sniper on those upper floors, the other team should be able to bring down the whole building with an artillery strike or three.

To me, Battlefield isn't about super accurate sim details. It's about large-scale tactics that come down to close quarters firefights, with all manner of skirmishes and space in between. Adding depth and intricacies to the maps can only enhance that.

[free2game]

Does this actually mean anything? Remember with Dragon Age it had that item tie in with Mass Effect 2 for each version and mass effect 2 sure as hell never ended up on the PS3.

[Romeo]

ME2 can't end up on the PS3, Microsoft owns the intellectual rights to it. lol

[Irate Iguana]

http://www.neoseeker.com/news/14494-battlefield-3-leaving-dx-9-behind-frostbite-2-engine-good-news-for-pc-gamers/

Good Stuff.

What's so good about it? The nebulous claims that since they won't support XP and DirectX9 it will somehow be a pure PC game? This is still a multiplatform release and a multiplatform engine. The consoles don't support anything higher than X9. You can bet that the differences between the various versions will be very small indeed. Maybe not now, but just you wait until the release date draws closer. You'll find that you'll end up with a slightly prettier Xbox360 version. Remember that it is Microsoft that has the big bucks and I doubt they will want a game that makes the Xbox360 look bad compared to the PC. Not that I care since I don't play those games.

[Jerion]

That XP and Dx9 won't be supported doesn't in and of itself indicate that it will be a "Pure" PC game, but the focus on Dx11's highlights does indicate that the platform's capabilities are being taken seriously. That is a good thing. As is (IMO) the phasing out of WinXP and D3D9.

Mostly though, any news is a good thing regardless of what it is. I think all of us here can relate to that. ;)

[free2game]

ME2 can't end up on the PS3, Microsoft owns the intellectual rights to it. lolNo, they don't. EA does. Microsoft wasn't at all involved with the publishing of ME2.

[Romeo]

No, they don't. EA does. Microsoft wasn't at all involved with the publishing of ME2.
Concerning EA wasn't even in the picture until the second game was already in devellopment... :rolleyes:

And it was put to EA why they don't make a PS3 version of ME and ME2, and it was already said they can't do that until they finish the trilogy, as Microsoft has exclusive rights to it.