BATTLEFIELD 3's Lead Development Platform "Switched" To Consoles In Mid-Production, DICE GM Karl-Mag

RavenXXX2 said:
Always said it was console port after seeing the map design .

.
Click to expand...

But it isn't a "console port", the entire basework was done on pc, if they switched mid development the pc foundation is still there.

That being said its convenient they only now mention this after the game has been released. That ea uk forum would have exploded if this was pre release info.
 
Last edited:
RavenXXX2 said:
No they changed development focus to consoles, why do you think the PC is missing many standard PC features and features that are implemented poorly and look rushed. Compare the maps to BF2, BF2 maps were built for 64 players, BF3 maps are not.
Click to expand...

So how does that make it a console port?

Xink said:
I would like a patch to address raven
Click to expand...

This. Dear god this.
 
Last edited:
Gerard said:
But it isn't a "console port", the entire basework was done on pc, if they switched mid development the pc foundation is still there.
Click to expand...

Gerrard I don't care if it's not a port technically, gameplay wise it definitely is, if you can't see that then well........

orderoftheflame said:
This. Dear god this.
Click to expand...


How about replying to my post, or do you just prefer to ignore the facts at hand. And this not the BF3 appreciation thread so members don't be afraid to express your views.

orderoftheflame said:
So how does that make it a console port?
Click to expand...

wow have you seen the clustered 5 cap limit on all maps in BF3 64 conquest, they look like maps designed for 64 players? fine hide from the facts but it's painfully obvious the maps are not designed for 64 conquest and more consoles and 24 players.
 
Last edited:
Some of us said this was blatantly the case. I have to say, from gameplay its very obvious. For me the clearest thing is how close together the flag points are! The game barely suits 64 players.
 
orderoftheflame said:
Yawn.. Another thread with people displaying ignorance over what a port is or isn't...

As an example... Moving workforce to focus on another version of the game is not porting.
Click to expand...

sure it is , they are porting the same game :D

a non console port would be a game with 2 different devlopment teams one for consoles and for for pc which is how it always was.

guess your to new to gaming to remember a time before ports
 
arknor said:
sure it is , they are porting the same game :D

a non console port would be a game with 2 different devlopment teams one for consoles and for for pc which is how it always was.
Click to expand...

In fairy land maybe. In software development that's not what porting is or has ever been. BF3 has been a multiplatform development from the start.

guess your to new to gaming to remember a time before ports
Click to expand...

I find this comment most amusing.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Always said it was console port after seeing the map design .

That explains the lack of PC specific features, poor squad management, no in game ping, no VOIP, no spectator mode, no battlerecorder, no sensitivity settings for vehicles and aircraft, poor flight mechanics and control that do not suit a mouse at all, mediocre joystick support, joke commo-rose, massive HUD for vehicles/aircraft, all standard PC features missing or poorly implemented.
Click to expand...

Is this why your BF3 sig has mysteriously disappeared? How bitter it must feel.....

EDIT: And who says ALL PC players want to see exactly these things? Who says PC players can't possibly enjoy the game because a load of pointless extras like spectator mode, battlerecorder etc. are not included. 95% of BF2 players probably never used battlerecorder and if a person misses spectator mode that much then that person really needs to look at their life and address certain issues. Who in the name of Jimmy Saville's ringpiece ringpiece wants to watch other people play games?
 
Last edited:
FirebarUK said:
Some of us said this was blatantly the case. I have to say, from gameplay its very obvious. For me the clearest thing is how close together the flag points are! The game barely suits 64 players.
Click to expand...



Thank you, you know what a true battlefield game on PC should be like for 64 players.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Gerrard I don't care if it's not a port technically, gameplay wise it definitely is, if you can't see that then well........
Click to expand...

The simple fact is you'd say that anyway, this isn't a direct clone of BF2 and thats essentially what you and a lot of others wanted with a graphics update. Theres a lot that can be changed with updates to the game, so get yer panties out of the knot theyre currently in.
 
RavenXXX2 said:
Facts are there, disprove them.
Click to expand...

Agreed. All your previous posts are there. It would be pretty hard to disprove your attitude with this mountain of evidence stacked against us.

In regards to the game being multiplatform and the pc not being the lead platform for the entire development process (or any of it imo)....le shock. Anybody that believed otherwise is overwhelmingly gullible.

Pretty much since the xbox360/etc came out, PC has not been the lead development platform. People need to accept this and get over it. This fact alone does not stop a game being good or enjoyable.

For what it's worth, I actually don't like BF3 and haven't purchased it (played Alpha and Beta). I just hate people coming out with idiotic comments that are based on their own fanatical obsessions rather than actual facts.
 
Gerard said:
The simple fact is you'd say that anyway, this isn't a direct clone of BF2 and thats essentially what you and a lot of others wanted with a graphics update. Theres a lot that can be changed with updates to the game, so get yer panties out of the knot theyre currently in.
Click to expand...

lol I give up, I swear you just post to be confrontational. I and many battlefield fans were expecting some maps similar to BF2 with caps that utilize the whole map and not the clustered, restricted meat grinder maps we got. Again if you think wanting proper battlefield maps that support 64 players properly in conquest is wanting a clone of BF2 then you're very much delusional.


Some excellent points in these threads, as you cans see a lot of players share similar views to me.

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654624716508655/

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/...atform-switched-consoles-mid-development.html
 
Last edited:
ScottMC7000 said:
So all that talk about PC being the lead platform, all the way up to launch was lies. So what we ended up with was a sub par console port. I feel sorry for those who shelled out hundreds of pounds to play this on a high end PC or new graphics card.

You just have to look at the size of the maps and flag placement to see this and average graphics which you can see in the jets in particular.

http://www.computerandvideogames.co...latform-switched-to-consoles-mid-development/
Click to expand...

Notsureifserious.jpg
 
RavenXXX2 said:
lol I give up, I swear you just post to be confrontational.
Click to expand...

Any whats your reasons for posting? Ranting about "herp derp console port" like a focus on consoles is anything new in this day and age? This isn't 2005 anymore, deal with it.

You must have the words "console port" permanently attached to your paste command.
 
Gerard said:
Any whats your reasons for posting? Ranting about "herp derp console port" like a focus on consoles is anything new in this day and age? This isn't 2005 anymore, deal with it.

You must have the words "console port" permanently attached to your paste command.
Click to expand...

Oh. I always assumed it was part of his sig?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom