Battlefield 3 thread - Server details in opening post -

Status
Not open for further replies.
True Wake was a bit unfair on the side whose 'team' didn't work together to get onto the island (or even as far as the little island with the arty on) without being annihilated by choppers / snipers.

But if played with the right people it can be a great fun map.
 
Zefan said:
Yeah, this is what I was referring to.

And I love being lefty on CS by the way. No idea why.
Click to expand...

Be interesting if you can select what hand the weapon is used from, more than likely though its just some kind of random selection with the odd soldier being left handed in SP.
 
Gerard said:
Wasn't a proper implementation in CS though, from what i remember you seen the gun on the left of the screen but the world models remained right handed?
Click to expand...

other way round, all the gun models are actually left handed as the guy who made them is left handed, that's why bullets fly into your face.


but when swapped to left handed view the guns were right handed because they were mirrored >.<
 
FirebarUK said:
Same. Karkand was good but couldn't stand the nad spamming at the flag nearest the US spawn.
Click to expand...

I loved Karkand but I agree, this was a annoying. The same applied to the passageways between the buildings around that flag too.

But apart from that, I thought the map was great! Nice balance of buildings/open space/water/more buildings/army base thing at the end on 64 player/vehicles/infantry. ;)
 
HUD and other stuff just simulates the sensory info you would have if not sitting on your couch

Sharqi > karland for sure :p Not a fan of chokepoints, it had less and more chance of a come back by a good team. Tanks but incredibly vunerable in tight streets



BF3checklist01a.png
xtteI.png
 
Iv said it before and Il say it again, since MW2's release Activision and COD have steadily declined (in quality) whilst Dice and the BF series have slowly moved in to the void vacated.

BO was pants and still is pants months after release. It wa never ready to be played, yet they asked £40 at release!

BF3 looks like a proper game, a proper game like COD4 was.. as in the last proper COD Activision created.

People keep saying nah you cahatting crap, but every single event in the time line since MW2 has slowly reinforced my view that the COD series is in serious decline.

Core gameplay - hasnt moved on since COD4. (All it has done is get messier with all that crap killstreaks etc)

Graphics - ohdear. Pants graphics. BO horrendous performance - game broken. Compared to BFBC2 which is pretty, and now BF3 amazing looking graphics, if Activision, dont seriouskly kick some but with the next COD release, then Dice wins again, more market share etc.....

But, how can the COD series upgrade the graphics, with out taking more risks? Technologically they are miles behind Dice, huge transitions neccessary to bring the COD series up to the level that Dice are delivering. Troubled waters.

BF3 is going to kick but. Im mostly excited about the native 64bit support. does that mean it will run better? Or do you think they have made it 64bit compatible, becuase the game is a resource hog, and only 64bits can meet its demands?
 
Last edited:
domthecondom said:
Has NO commander been offically confirmed? :( NOOOOOOOOOOOOO it ain't no battlefield without commander :( waaah waaah waaaah :( :mad:
Click to expand...


Commander would have meant more if he had been in command. The ability to have squad leaders vote him out would be good (pr does this) but also for the CO to put a SL on notice they will be dismissed if not following the game plan.

When did anyone ever coordinate according to the request of the commander, never which is a real shame because BF is better because it hints ocassionally your brain may be of use
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom