Associate
- Joined
- 1 Sep 2007
- Posts
- 2,205
- Location
- St. Helens & Blackpool
no
As i was reading his post I thought exactly the same thing. a great game maybe, but "in the history of ever made games ever".
NO
Battlefield 3 thread - Server details in opening post -
- Thread starter [TFU] Thegoon84
- Start date
- Status
As i was reading his post I thought exactly the same thing. a great game maybe, but "in the history of ever made games ever".
NO
Lol, that gifs awesome
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 20,344
- Location
- Stanley Hotel, Colorado
Anyone can call up bf2 stats, you just need his bf2 name and that'll reference his player number
I really dont think BF3 will be the greatest game ever. It might be like Crysis, something a bit special but not massively in gameplay terms. Classic games are a rarity
If they done it right it'll be good for at least a year and really they make more money just churning out similar games annually then something special
I really dont think BF3 will be the greatest game ever. It might be like Crysis, something a bit special but not massively in gameplay terms. Classic games are a rarity
If they done it right it'll be good for at least a year and really they make more money just churning out similar games annually then something special
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 12 Oct 2010
- Posts
- 2,319
- Location
- Stratford, London
Apart from September, noskis
I dunno, the alpha was stunning. Once in a while a game comes along and pushes all the buttons. The only problem with it is the lack of server side client, it will cost a small fortune to run a 64 man server especially with the certified hosting partners being useless as there is no competition for them.
![[TFU] Thegoon84](/styles/overclockers/avatars/6.png){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- 17 Jun 2009
- Posts
- 7,089
- Location
- Swansea
80p a slot I recon. My clan will be getting a 64 man server.
It won't be the best game ever made in the history of games, but it will be a good game nonetheless.
Associate
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2008
- Posts
- 692
one thing that i dont understand is why then that most games dont fully use quad cores from what i remember, at the time i remember dual core being far greater in real game terms than quad core. Even in BF2 beta/game dual core seemed to rule a lot more than quad, example being e8400 seemed a lot better than Q6600.
if BF3 will be optimised properly then what options do i have then, as dual core i would hope is still decent enough to play it?
I have watercooled system so can push if need be upto 4.0 ghz instead of 3.0...just dont facny buying a whole new CPU, would rather get GPU instead.
Black ops benefits from all the power thrown at it, as its a badly ported piece of ****.
Yep, a while back dual was the norm, at a time supreme commander was a good example of a quad optimised game, as there were few about. More common now, ive seen a few users reporting decent gains in bfbc2 from dual to quad. Black ops seems to be the first of the cod's that really benefits from a quad. I havent played it in a while, but i remember on release, for me it didnt play very well with sli, very low gpu usage and very jerky.
Whoever ported it to pc needs a boot in the swingers, i play it on eyefinity 5760x1080 with 4xfsaa and on some maps its dropping to around 40 or so fps for short periods. Makes no sense considering the game looks about 5 years old and theres really no nifty effects going on that would cause this kind of performance hit.
same price as bfbc2
you should be able to swop current servers for moh and bfbc2 to bf3 on mp
Ever since cod mw1, the series has went downhill a bit. Mw2 was ok, but bo was a bit meh. I only hope that the next version go's someway to improving, as i really enjoyed mw1. But the engine is indeed starting to look a bit dated now.
IMO it went downhill after the console elements started to appear in cod2. These days the games about killstreaks, prone spamming and lame little callins that can decimate the entire enemy team.
COD1 + UO >>>>>>>>>>>> the rest of the series.
Its got nothing to do with consoles and everything about appealing to a different market.
Its about mass market appeal and making **** load of $$$$$
Something that can't be done when you appeal only to a very specific group of nerds on the internet who only want a certain type of game and will cry "CONSOLE LOL" anytime anybody talks about changing the game away from their beloved format (as is happening with BF3)
So you wouldnt consider regenerating health and lack of recoil console specific? Never mind the fact that both of these for the cod series only appeared as soon as the game went multi platform.
Last edited:
The lack of recoil in the latest cod games does make them a little to easy. Unlike bc2, recoil on some of the weapons can be pretty dramatic, the m14 being a good example. Gotta make sure you either kill with the first shot, or get in real close for a follow up. The same weapon in bo performs more like a bb gun.
As long as its multiplatform it'll remain the same, recoil is literally unmanagable on controllers so its really not implemented to any degree, then they dont change it much if at all for the pc iteration. Yet according to mrlol this is called catering to the masses...
- Status