New video - Caspian Border Map - Multiplayer

[Guest =VG= Chaz]

Finally some footage showing a large scale map with aircraft and helos!

[=VG= Ingo]

well hoooly shiit o.o

[Iffn]

BF3 CoOp: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/gc-11-battlefield-3/719048

Thx to the console gamers, the max human player count is lower than in a L4D2 campain... (Yes, 2 is the max http://www.neoseeker.com/news/16673-battlefield-3-co-op-is-two-player-has-exclusive-missions/ )

They were able to make a better version of Project Reality but they made a COD-clone... !fuk

[=VG= BLuDKLoT]

That video looks so crazy epic, but only 2 player coop sucks. That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen. Why even include it as a mode if only two freaking people can play it. These guys need to stop hiring the Xbox generation, they're ruining gaming as we know it.

From my cold dead hands gawd dammit!

We need to get an "Endangered Species" graphic for the site.

[Guest DTRON]

First response here at =VG= was some hate-o-raid. I'm glad SOME community members here are amped.

[Iffn]

About the video Chaz posted:
Finaly, I see some flying parts and it looks like in bf2. but I wonder how they controll these cockpit views like in 1:42.


There are basicly 2 problems with the consoles:

The first problem is that the current consoles are already 6 years old which means that there hardware is not able to deal with to many players and objects.

The second problem is that console games are usually played by 14-16 year old kids who just want to see some explosions and feel like a "hero in war" without any intersts in slower, team based games like Project Reality.

[Bones]

For all you guys bitching about this and that if you don't like it don't play it. Simple as that... Are EA and DICE in it for the money, well of course they are it would be very bad business if they were not. So is it a surprise that they cater to the console guys/gals out there, not really seeing as the console market is so freakin huge!

I'm pretty sure none of you guys are willing to work your job for free just to please someone.

As for me, I'll get it and enjoy it for what it is. Sure, it may not be the second coming of Christ/BF2 but at least I can appreciate the merits of others in their creations without the need to slander or belittle their work.

[Guest =VG= Chaz]

Iffn LAN_WROTE ...

About the video Chaz posted:
Finaly, I see some flying parts and it looks like in bf2. but I wonder how they controll these cockpit views like in 1:42.

Most likely with the joystick POV switch like in previous BF titles. The view panning doesn't look smooth enough to indicate Track IR support.

[=VG= BLuDKLoT]

I think it looks amazing, the only thing I don't like is the 2 player coop. Why change something that has been a constant with all the games they make until now? Why can't they continue with 32 player coop like BF2 is my only complaint. Other than that I couldn't really play the Alpha cus it ate my PC's resources like nobodies business.

[Iffn]

@bones money argument and to explain my hate-o-raid:
EA and DICE will get there moneys worth anyways. The problem is that they dumb the game down just to avoid any potential risks. They already proved with games like Battlefield 1942, the Sims and Spore that they can be veary inovative so why do they clone CoD and Bad Company and sell them with some new cinematics?

I don't care if it's not the most hardware consuming game out there, it's possible to make a good looking game which uses less advanced render technologies but I don't want to pay for a game which is against any new gameplay features.

For example, there are hunderts of ways how you could use commanders, squads, civilians, hidden ammo caches, player built outposts, ground, sea and air vehicles, UAV's, hidden locations in large, non-linear maps and different weapons and ammo types to create an amazing combat enviroment but why does it need to be a staight forward "run and gun"-game with nothing intersting about it?

[Bones]

@ Iffn

Answer is "Why should they "innovate" when they can reap the rewards of cloning (which after playing in the Alpha I don't think they have done BTW) the most successful FPS. Remember the name of the game is "make a shit ton of money!"

Also since you mentioned cloning, according to your post wouldn't they just be "cloning" ARMA? Besides everything you mentioned is not in line with what the traditional Battlefield experience is about. It has pretty much always been how it is depicted in the newest video. It wasn't until the mod community created some fantastic mods (see I can give credit to where credit is due) did the core gameplay change. You guys have been stuck on FH and PR for so long I sometime think you have forgotten what vanilla BF is like.

See not really that easy to innovate is it?

[dman248]

Gay, console flying planes, same as bf1943. Take a look, the paning of the view is the same.

[Iffn]

@Bones
I have nothing against a company who wants to make a awesome, arcade style FPS like Brink or Quake but why do they need to sell it as a serious military simulator?

I'm not telling them to reinvent the wheel or WASD but adding some dynamic gameplay elements rather than spending all there money on a interactive movie shouldn't be to much to ask for.

[Bones]

Who ever said it was a "serious military simulator?" If anything every BF (1942, BF2, BF2142, BFBC, BFBC2, BF1943) product has been an military "themed" arcade FPS.

Anyway I think I might have found the uber realistic mil sim that you guys seem to be craving. Just watch it it's funny!

[Iffn]

i think this should explain my problem better than any of my 10-line posts:




thx to Outlanders for posting this pic a while ago in the chat box.

And if you want an other example and this one was even mady by EA:

[=VG= Outlanders]

Looks pretty good and modern.
I'm just gonna flip a coin. Preorder or not.

Nah. Not today.

[Bones]

Iffn LAN_WROTE ...

i think this should explain my problem better than any of my 10-line posts:




thx to Outlanders for posting this pic a while ago in the chat box.

And if you want an other example and this one was even mady by EA:

Doesn't really explain anything other than that you obviously have no idea what you are talking about seeing as you are comparing MP to SP with that picture. Funny I'll admit, but certainly does not help your argument.

To illustrate my point all I need to do is ask this simple question:

Why do you play PR? Is it to play PR or is it to play stock BF2?

If your answer is to play PR then of course you are going to dislike BF3 as its gameplay, or better yet the series essence/foundation, core, (aw fuck it! what made the BF series the BF freaking series) is nothing remotely close to what PR succeeds in doing. Stop expecting DICE to create/stray from what the BF foundation is. No one promised some super hyper realistic military simulator, that was created in all the die hard PR/ARMA fanboys minds. That gameplay type is not what the BF series is all about. It's what the mods like PR are about, if anything why not complain to Black Sands Studios to get their act together and create a new and unique game of there own design instead of mods for existing games.

PS that COD video is very funny BTW! !yes But again get your facts straight, it was not made by DICE it was done for the game "BulletStorm" by EPIC games but yes EA is the publisher. C'mon Iffin, if you are gonna argue at least know what you are talking about.

[Guest =VG= DTRON]

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

That "Excellent" was excellent!

Ya, the Onion News Network is funny as hell. I remember when The Onion was just a funny newspaper. So glad to see them in the parody news channel business!!

!offtopic ok...I'll buy it, play it when I wanna just blow stuff up. Gotta see how possible teamwork is going to be, TvT, and how the spawn/respawn works to keep the team rallied and together. The best improvements were by PR, so won't be present in BF3.

The video is very well done. Looks like a fun game to play, but sucks that I have to do it against other players, rather than with them. I can do PvP/TvT, I just don't prefer it. THE BIGGEST TRAGEDY IS the loss of COOP and the NO MODDING! We clearly will have to wait for BF4 to see very realistic looking gunplay cause this is a "tracer fest".

Bones and Iffn both have good points, mostly clear. EA does like money, and isn't about to fashion their newest installment off of the models of successful mods that have been created for their games. I bet they're pissed off that a large amount of their fans, when asked about the game BF2, probably know it for the mods, not the vanilla. Therefore, they cut off the...ability...of the modders to keep all hype and fandom about the original game they release.

BUT - all games follow a progressive evolution. Before geo-mod technology, no damage ever happened to static buildings and structures. They may as well have been made of dolomite. So, newer games usually include some ideas and gaming innovations from the body of works and the current evolution of the genre. Right now, all they need to do is pack more action and awesome explosions in, structural damage, etc. Just like BC and COD....cause those lead the genre!!!!! It's popular and, unfortunately, like all reviews (LOOKING AT YOU NETFLIX REVIEWERS!) if you are not the target audience, then of course your opinion and review of the item is going to be bad.
I just read a review about an oldie, Die Hard, 1 star...they called it a "self serving man-flick"....DUH!!! YOUR A CHICK< Watch a chick flick!!! Bet those all got 5 stars and made her cry!!! We should be pissed they broadened their target audience to include what we all dislike, the "I need constant stimulation" youth video gamers!

I personally feel that wargames have about 3-4 sub-genres; Fast First Person Shooters, Larger Vehicular and Squad Combat Games, Mil-Sim Mods of FPS and Vehicular, and Mil-Sim Wargames with many, many buttons and systems.

For me, Battlefield games always fell in the Larger Vehicular and Squad Combat Games....for one, they allow 3rd Person views and have vehicles. Then, I luckily discovered PR Mod, and found it could streatch the game into the 3rd sub-genre; Mil-Sim Mods of FPS and Vehicular.

But, never will I expect it to be what it was, 1942: Desert Combat Mod....basic graphics, little sense of action, wide open battlefields. Now, I expect it to show more Urban Combat as MOUT is clearly the future of war. I also expect it now to continue to deliver on Vehicular Combat on a large, non-linear map. I see no problems so far, except that they took away the coop element. I never expected the gunplay to look crisp and realistic like in ArmA....that's why I own ArmA, so I don't have to expect any other game to do that.

And to me, gunplay in these videos looks exciting, but far from any sense of realism....guys are literally running and gunning. When I play that game, you'll be able to see me. I'll be the guy who consistantly takes a knee and aims down sights before shooting.
!gundown