• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Battlefield 3

Bambi

Member
Love the beta.

Can't wait to get this for the XBox 360. I <3 operation Metro's underground section.

Also got some gameplay videos up, too.
 

Cain

Guess what mood I'm in today.
Been playing the beta for a while now, and most of the bugs have been fixed, which is really quite good. The neat thing is that they've opened up public Caspian Border servers, but they're really laggy due to stress-testing, so I mainly stay on Metro.

I spent ages as the support class, waiting to unlock the M223 (?) Mortar, and when I finally did: "Not Avaliable in Beta"... FFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU- But I do understand why they didn't include the mortar in the beta, because it's a completely different aspect of the game, and would be better left hidden ;D.

But I rarely see players take use in the fire-select. I use it quite often, usually as Assault or Engineer, where I switch frequently between single-shot and fully-auto, for long-medium range and short-medium range, respectively. Although subtle, can really work for you, once you get the motion of Single shot, kill long range around the M-COM, run in, switch to auto, hose anyone still around the M-COM, arm the M-COM, retreat, and switch between auto and single for targets converging on the M-COM. It is hilarious when you see someone trying to take out another cross-map fully auto, not even firing in bursts.

Anyways, I'm loving the game, and can't wait for the full release.
 

Schwimmwagen

Well-Known Member
I spent ages as the support class, waiting to unlock the M223 (?) Mortar, and when I finally did: "Not Avaliable in Beta"... FFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU- But I do understand why they didn't include the mortar in the beta, because it's a completely different aspect of the game, and would be better left hidden ;D.

It'd actually be a lot better if it was left in, so it could actually be tested.
 

Sarcastic Coffeecup

Hand. Cannot. Erase.
It'd actually be a lot better if it was left in, so it could actually be tested.
Maybe they'll unlock it for everyone later. Just like Bayonets in RO2
 

Cain

Guess what mood I'm in today.
It'd actually be a lot better if it was left in, so it could actually be tested.
Meh, some other things aren't avaliable in the beta, like co-op, campaign, as well as some more multiplayer weapons. I don't know why they've left them out, the weapons I mean.
 

Schwimmwagen

Well-Known Member
Meh, some other things aren't avaliable in the beta, like co-op, campaign, as well as some more multiplayer weapons. I don't know why they've left them out, the weapons I mean.

The thing that annoys me here is the fact that they don't seem to know if they want to make a Beta or a demo version. :/ I can understand them leaving out the campaign, but not multiplayer gamemodes. If they added certain weapons into the beta later on, that'd be fair enough, but no leaving them out of the whole thing. ._. What's the point in calling it a beta if you're not gonna bother to test some more of the core stuff?
 

Onnes

Member
The beta is pretty explicitly focused on the technical side of the game. In particular, they are testing the new server browser and stat tracking system. Given this focus, they don't have any reason to expose all of the game's features during the test. Developers prefer to reserve the bulk of gameplay for paying customers.
 

Schwimmwagen

Well-Known Member
The beta is pretty explicitly focused on the technical side of the game. In particular, they are testing the new server browser and stat tracking system. Given this focus, they don't have any reason to expose all of the game's features during the test. Developers prefer to reserve the bulk of gameplay for paying customers.

But what is important is testing those features. It'd be pretty embarassing for them to be hiding something during the beta, and then everyone can see on release that that feature is a buggy piece of mess.
 

Onnes

Member
But what is important is testing those features. It'd be pretty embarassing for them to be hiding something during the beta, and then everyone can see on release that that feature is a buggy piece of mess.

Obviously EA has a large QA team working on this title, along with more exclusive groups of unpaid testers. Stress tests are about hunting down bugs in systems like the server browser and dealing with rare hardware related issues that cannot be covered by a small base of testers. Games that make all of their features available prior to release through a beta are very much the exception and not the rule.
 

Schwimmwagen

Well-Known Member
Obviously EA has a large QA team working on this title, along with more exclusive groups of unpaid testers. Stress tests are about hunting down bugs in systems like the server browser and dealing with rare hardware related issues that cannot be covered by a small base of testers. Games that make all of their features available prior to release through a beta are very much the exception and not the rule.

If that was really the case, they wouldn't have done a public beta like this. EA has been around for years and years and in all this time they've had perfectly fine multiplayer games without external betas. In the case of BF3, they actually sold the idea of early access. I miss the days when people didn't have to pay for demos and demos were used as a wonderful "try before you buy" thing that everyone found quite agreeable. I know the beta is free now, but they baited loads of people in beforehand, so the whole thing is a scam, really. In the old days, there'd just be a "demo" version of a game with no bullshit included. Back then, they actually knew how to make games and test them properly before letting the public get their hands on it, now in lots of game firms - not just EA - are pretty much selling these demo versions.
 

Horro

~Rawr :)
I played the open beta on PS3 when it came out and it was so awesome. I even went and picked up a copy of Bad Company 2. After playing hours on end of Bad Company, I realized how much better it was than the Battlefield 3 beta. Of course it's only a beta so you can't judge everything as final but I didn't find it as fun.
 

Bambi

Member
FFFFFFFFF I love the sound design in Battlefield 3. Is it wrong of me to say how much it feels and hears like a war documentary? Not exactly the most ethical thing to be pining for, but the dedication to realism is what makes the HDR-sounds in this game tits.
 

FF_CCSa1F

Hippie
Am I the only person in the whole world who things the Battlefield 3 so-called beta (I'd rather call it an alpha.) is absolutely horrible in almost every way imaginable? As someone sad enough to have spent almost 3000 hours of his life playing ranked Battlefield 2, I can't help but feel like they just took Bad Company 2 (which also is a rather horrible game, mind you) and everything they got wrong in Battlefield 2, mixed them up and called it something new.

The graphics are a horrible, low-saturation, high-contrast, high-HDR, two-colour mess. The performance on anything less than a very high end computer is horrific, considering how the game looks and behaves. The vehicle upgrade system is ridiculous. The scoring system is horrible, and you get so many little rewards along the way that ranking up loses significance. The vehicles are nowhere near as fun to drive as those in earlier Battlefield games. It is not a proper PC game. I could go on typing this all night.

Surely, I can't be the only one who feels this way.
 

Kryn

Flyin' Sooo High
Yeah looks like you are. I played about 400 hours of BF2, never played any of the console only versions. I thought BC2 was alright but limited by consoles. And I think BF3 is pretty fucking awesome. I run the game maxed out with 50+fps so performance is no issue to me. Honestly I think its a good blend of all the PC features like prone and 64 players combined with some console stuff for accessibility. Honestly I think it's a good blend and is simply fun to play. You're just looking to far into the details.

And whats wrong with the scoring system? Its about the same as all the past games, just lots and lots of ribbons lol.

The only real complaint I have right now is not being able to pick your squad and playing with your friends, but that's already been confirmed to be fixed for release.
 
Last edited:

FF_CCSa1F

Hippie
You're missing one of the most crucial points that I'm trying to make: Battlefield 3, the successor to Battlefield 2, should not be a "good blend". It should be a pure-breed. The fact that its pedigree isn't Battlefield 2, but rather Battlefield Bad Company 2, a game and game engine designed with consoles in mind, is showing. It is but a console game with some "PC features" tacked onto it, half of which we haven't even seen yet.

Regarding the scoring system, there simply is too much of it. You shouldn't get extra points for ribbons and medals, it's redundant. You're given more points for earning points, and I just find that to remove some of the "soul" of the game; you don't fight to get a medal because you really want it, you fight to get it because of the totally sweet 20 000 point bonus that's attached to it.

TL;DR: BF3 is a console shooter with no soul.
 

Scotty1700

is bored :V
Am I the only person in the whole world who things the Battlefield 3 so-called beta (I'd rather call it an alpha.) is absolutely horrible in almost every way imaginable? As someone sad enough to have spent almost 3000 hours of his life playing ranked Battlefield 2, I can't help but feel like they just took Bad Company 2 (which also is a rather horrible game, mind you) and everything they got wrong in Battlefield 2, mixed them up and called it something new.

The graphics are a horrible, low-saturation, high-contrast, high-HDR, two-colour mess. The performance on anything less than a very high end computer is horrific, considering how the game looks and behaves. The vehicle upgrade system is ridiculous. The scoring system is horrible, and you get so many little rewards along the way that ranking up loses significance. The vehicles are nowhere near as fun to drive as those in earlier Battlefield games. It is not a proper PC game. I could go on typing this all night.

Surely, I can't be the only one who feels this way.

I hear ya there. Literally the only thing that had me excited about BF3 was the fact that you can have no optics on Sniper rifles.....my money's on MW3 for sure as I'm a diehard cod fan.
 

Cain

Guess what mood I'm in today.
Yeah looks like you are. I played about 400 hours of BF2, never played any of the console only versions. I thought BC2 was alright but limited by consoles. And I think BF3 is pretty fucking awesome. I run the game maxed out with 50+fps so performance is no issue to me. Honestly I think its a good blend of all the PC features like prone and 64 players combined with some console stuff for accessibility. Honestly I think it's a good blend and is simply fun to play. You're just looking to far into the details.

And whats wrong with the scoring system? Its about the same as all the past games, just lots and lots of ribbons lol.

The only real complaint I have right now is not being able to pick your squad and playing with your friends, but that's already been confirmed to be fixed for release.
I agree with this.
FF-whatever your name is, the scoring system is great, you get points for just playing a rush round, but you get more for winning it, for all the other ribbons, etc. They're rewarding your gameplay, and tbh I don't think many people focus on getting bonus points, that'd seem quite redundant tbh.
 

FF_CCSa1F

Hippie
I agree with this.
FF-whatever your name is, the scoring system is great, you get points for just playing a rush round, but you get more for winning it, for all the other ribbons, etc. They're rewarding your gameplay, and tbh I don't think many people focus on getting bonus points, that'd seem quite redundant tbh.

I wouldn't be whining if it was only that. Being rewarded with points for winning a round is fine in my book, BF2 too had that implemented. My problem is that you get extra points for virtually everything you do. My opinion is that awards most definitely should not be tied to receiving extra score in any way, they should rely on your want for them to feel worthwhile.
 

Unsilenced

Mentlegen
At one point this was one of those games that I was just going to buy no matter what, but now I'm not so sure. Part of it is that I'm playing video games less in general, but this game especially just... doesn't really get my attention I guess.

I liked BC2, even though it had a completely forgettable campaign (that had absolutely nothing to do at all with the idea of Bad Company.) The ability to destroy buildings completely provided a huge tactical shift from the original Bad Company since it meant that any insufficiently aggressive defense would get literally buried by mortars and grenades if they failed to clear them out. The classes were balanced and I spent a good deal of time with each of them, eventually getting all the unlocks. Teamwork was rewarded, but not at the exclusion of those who wanted to go lone wolf.

Now BF2 (god I hate the numbering in this series) was a game I never really got into. I got it at the same time I got BF2142 (computer camp where we learned to mod the games) and never really liked it as much. Wasn't much good at either though, and my career kdr never did go above 1.

...

Captured points like a champ though in 2142. Drop pods FTW.

Anyways, maybe I'm judging to soon, but BF3 doesn't look like it adds much. Better graphics maybe... though if I got it it'd probably have to be for the 360 so no eye-melting visuals for me.

I get that they're trying really hard to beat Call of Duty, but that's kind of the thing. CoD is trying to be a good* game. The fact that they're openly trying to beat CoD on CoD's home turf means they've made themselves the Pepsi of military shooters. They can be better all day long, but being Pepsi means they always lose.


/uninformedopinions

*in terms of sales at the very least.
 

DexDoggy

New Member
I remember reading somewhere on the official twitter that there were graphic restrictions in the beta. One can only hope.
bf3-high-res-8.jpg
 

DexDoggy

New Member
Hahahahaha

I hope this is a joke.

Personally, I could care less. The graphics were good enough for me. But something seemed iffy about the fact that there was very little difference between high and ultra settings. I didn't notice any better textures, just some lighting.
 

kylr23

Member
I sort of wished I could play the game with out playing it in a lame small window. I can barly play or afford to upgrade/rebuild a pc at the time so Im sticking to bc2 for now. But the game is awsome form what I played despite my minor set back. Its like bf2 and badcompany 2 mixedtogether and it is good. Perosnaly I love rush mode the pace, and the sheer amount of stradegy you need to put itno it is enough to make me fall inlove.
 
Top