EA backstabs pc gamers. Battlefield 3 console game
- Thread starter svs22
- Start date
What people are missing is the fact the main limitation for map size due on BC2 was because of the amount of destructible buildings in each map, remember when people begged for Karkand and they said "We can't make a map of that size with all those buildings because the engine wont be able to support the amount of destruction for this size", consoles can very well handle maps the same size as the PC, it's the player counts that will be lesser. Now as someone said, the console can't handle as much being rendered on the screen as the PC due to limitations of the hardware, with BF2 if you remember the maps weren't enclosed that much and many battles were happening everywhere on the map unlike BC2 where the main purpose of the game is to have lots and lots happening in a small area, which means more has to be rendered at once on the console giving it the crappy player limit on BC2. With open maps there's a high probability consoles will have a high player count, maybe like a 48 player limit while PC will have their 64 player limit, and with big open maps the chance of getting a HUGE battle all in 1 place will be low, DICE knows this.
If they want to port this game they know they have to appeal to the PC too, though BC2 was a port, it wasn't a BAD port, there were some things which weren't that good, but overall the game was playable, much more playable that BF2 or BF2142 when they were released, not so much now after the patches, I think though it was due to the maps being very simplified for the consoles, but then it was a console game.
People are always going to sing "We're doomed, we're doomed!" over every little thing when it's just been announced for consoles, if you didn't think BF3 was going to be on the consoles as well as the PC then you are truly a muppet, anyone with half a brain would have known that it was very likely BF3 would come to the consoles as well. I think everyone needs to chill out and wait till things are announced about the game before you go up in arms saying how it will fail and be a crappy console port before you even know any details about it.
Edit: Actually after thinking about it, the limit for consoles will be a lot lower, also will be the PC limit, sadly
If they want to port this game they know they have to appeal to the PC too, though BC2 was a port, it wasn't a BAD port, there were some things which weren't that good, but overall the game was playable, much more playable that BF2 or BF2142 when they were released, not so much now after the patches, I think though it was due to the maps being very simplified for the consoles, but then it was a console game.
People are always going to sing "We're doomed, we're doomed!" over every little thing when it's just been announced for consoles, if you didn't think BF3 was going to be on the consoles as well as the PC then you are truly a muppet, anyone with half a brain would have known that it was very likely BF3 would come to the consoles as well. I think everyone needs to chill out and wait till things are announced about the game before you go up in arms saying how it will fail and be a crappy console port before you even know any details about it.
Edit: Actually after thinking about it, the limit for consoles will be a lot lower, also will be the PC limit, sadly
Last edited:
Reading quite a few posts here that are basically banging on about how great BF2 is/will be by comparison.... so it seems pretty simple to me, just play BF2 if that's what you enjoy?
Personally I thought the singleplayer in BF2 was pretty poor, not a patch on say Frontlines Fuel of War (made by the Desert Combat people I think). It's primarily a MP game of course but if BF3 is multiplatform I'm guessing they might put some sort of a campaign in, which I'd be interested in.
Personally I thought the singleplayer in BF2 was pretty poor, not a patch on say Frontlines Fuel of War (made by the Desert Combat people I think). It's primarily a MP game of course but if BF3 is multiplatform I'm guessing they might put some sort of a campaign in, which I'd be interested in.
erm lol what? people arent alowed to expect a game to be better than its previous version thats many years old now?
we know because of consoles the maps will be smaller , the amount of players will be reduced , the game will be about rushing as fast as possible with no tactics.
the BF series was never about single player either so what are you talking about?
bf1942 , bf vietnam , bf2 only had single player so people could learn the maps and vehicles nothing more it was mp with bots
BF2 my best online game ever and the best £25 I have ever spent on a game as I still play this five year old game to this very day. A 64 man fully populated server on Gulf or Dalian is some experience even today, let's hope Dice don't screw us over and give BF2 the follow up it deserves and I think they will.
Consoles will get a very watered down version but the the PC version will not be held back in features, there are a few in Dice that know the score regarding Bf2 and what 3 should consist of to make it a worthy title. They can sell way more copies on the PC if they make it a cracker, no piracy here as being online you need a legit copy, so it's in EA's/Dice's interests to make the PC game stellar.
Consoles will get a very watered down version but the the PC version will not be held back in features, there are a few in Dice that know the score regarding Bf2 and what 3 should consist of to make it a worthy title. They can sell way more copies on the PC if they make it a cracker, no piracy here as being online you need a legit copy, so it's in EA's/Dice's interests to make the PC game stellar.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 10,113
- Location
- Gibraltar
I really wish that was the case but deep down will get the right shaft. Anyways how many people in dice do actualy know how to make a proper bf game. bfbc2 was good but its no battlefield.
ot how are you liking your hot 480
There are a few in Dice who know the backlash they will get if they water down the PC version, so IMO the PC will get a fully fledged BF title to match BF2 in its epicness.
BC2 was a console game first PC game second, BF3 will be a PC game first and a console game second I guarantee you.
Regarding the 480, comes monday, and it won't run hot, 70% fan speed will see to that.
BC2 was a console game first PC game second, BF3 will be a PC game first and a console game second I guarantee you.
Regarding the 480, comes monday, and it won't run hot, 70% fan speed will see to that.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,149
- Location
- Neptune
I think the engines these days on consoles (BFBC2 for instance) are actually very good. Doesn't feel limited to me (compared to BF2). Map sizes are similar, and the actually graphics/destruction 2.0 is a big improvement over what they had in BF2.
I will still say this though: BF2 on the PC is still my all time favourite MP game. Had a lotta laughs with that.
I will still say this though: BF2 on the PC is still my all time favourite MP game. Had a lotta laughs with that.
I hope you are right, I really do.
Sorry forgot to add something about my long ass post, proof that maps will be as big as in BF2:
Also jets etc etc etc.
The only thing consoles has is a lower player limit than PC. You can expect BF3 to have the same map size as BF2, the player limit may be slightly lower due to the engines limitations, but we'll have to see about that.
Also jets etc etc etc.
The only thing consoles has is a lower player limit than PC. You can expect BF3 to have the same map size as BF2, the player limit may be slightly lower due to the engines limitations, but we'll have to see about that.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Apr 2010
- Posts
- 5,298
- Location
- Ipswich
If the player limit is lower on bf3 compared to bf2 ill cry man lol
80% chance it will be, because of the frostbite limitations.
They're updating the engine to 2.0 from 1.5 so it may be better. I hope to god for 64 limit maps, but I get the feeling it'll be lower, it all honesty.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 16,149
- Location
- Neptune
If they had dedicated servers for the console version of the game, could the higher player limit work?
In the grand scheme of things i don't really know if player count makes a large difference. Think about most of the maps in BF2 and how many actually seemed as if there were 64 players on them, most of the battles were spread out over the map and most of the time it was little squads of several players going against each other. Some maps even with 64 players felt pretty empty as the battles just spread out all over the place.
Thats obviously where dice took the queue from quake wars and came up with rush mode so the battles are much more intense and centered around a specific location instead of all over the place on a large map.
That being said i do miss maps like el-alemain from 1942, that map had it all, air to air combat, tank battles over range and decent infantry encounters. Closest bc2 has to that is atacama which is tiny by comparison and the flight ceiling just seems stupid.
Thats obviously where dice took the queue from quake wars and came up with rush mode so the battles are much more intense and centered around a specific location instead of all over the place on a large map.
That being said i do miss maps like el-alemain from 1942, that map had it all, air to air combat, tank battles over range and decent infantry encounters. Closest bc2 has to that is atacama which is tiny by comparison and the flight ceiling just seems stupid.
how is that proof? its an bf1942 map that was remade for bf2......
its not one of the biggest maps in bf2
theres 64player maps that are twice as big