• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Battlefield 3 News Thread of BE ADVISED: Reviews On Monday

Status
Not open for further replies.
Foliorum Viridum said:
Nah, I understand the notion. It's why I hate the idea of Battlelog.

I like "being in" a game. I like having menus, a nice UI, everything there. The idea of going back to the desktop etc can only take me out of an experience. Qutting out of a game to launch something via a web browser feels like something you'd have to do for a shitty F2P game, not a AAA title.

The bolded part is really true. It's purely psychological but people who have played crappy F2P korean MMOs or BF4Free well know that feeling, launching a game from a web browser feels pretty cheap. It doesn't feel like a "proper" game or a full fleshed out product.

That being said, I dont mind Battlelog, it worked well in the alpha but it doesn't feel the same as an ingame browser.
 

SamuraiX-

Member
narcosis219 said:
Heavily dependent on everything else in your system.

If you have a fricking single core pentium 4, then you get 5 fps.

hah

So that means the game has a good balance of dependence based on processing power and GPU? Good to know.

CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 Quad Core 3.4 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 1024 MB
RAM: 4 GB DDR3

I'm hoping that'll be at least enough to let me run on high settings.
 
Mendelevium said:
Where can I watch the stream if they come online.

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/fullstory.php?id=165303

That's where the story was, hope it helps.


BlindCommunication said:
The bolded part is really true. It's purely psychological but people who have played crappy F2P korean MMOs or BF4Free well know that feeling, launching a game from a web browser feels pretty cheap. It doesn't feel like a "proper" game or a full fleshed out product.

That being said, I dont mind Battlelog, it worked well in the alpha but it doesn't feel the same as an ingame browser.

True, but I'll take the friend/community/social aspect of a game over the "feel" of playing a game. Really glad DICE is prioritizing playing with friends via Battlelog.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
I really hope that the Back to Karkand maps come up in normal rotation and that the added weapons will be useable on other maps. It would definitely help to add a lot to the MP after it's been out for a bit, people are maxed, out and MW3 is out.
 
SamuraiX- said:
hah

So that means the game has a good balance of dependence based on processing power and GPU? Good to know.

CPU: AMD Phenom II 965 Quad Core 3.4 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 1024 MB
RAM: 4 GB DDR3

I'm hoping that'll be at least enough to let me run on high settings.

I have similar specs are yours, with a weaker card (HD 5770) and weaker CPU (2.9Ghz) and I could run Alpha at a very playable framerate. It was somewhere around 30-40fps.
 

The Stealth Fox

Junior Member
I play at 1680x1050. I have a 560 TI, 8 GB DDR3, and a Phenom II X4 955BE. I hate having to turn stuff down (and would like to keep most of the "ultra settings"), but I'm willing to compromise on stuff like AA/AF...

I hate this game, but I love it at the same time.
 

RoboPlato

I'd be in the dick
The Stealth Fox said:
I play at 1680x1050. I have a 560 TI, 8 GB DDR3, and a Phenom II X4 955BE. I hate having to turn stuff down (and would like to keep most of the "ultra settings"), but I'm willing to compromise on stuff like AA/AF...

I hate this game, but I love it at the same time.
You'll probably be fine at that resolution.
 

Piggus

Member
I just hope it runs well on ATi cards and not just Nvidia.

Specs are:

2x overclocked 5850s in Crossfire
8 GBs 1600mhz DDR3
Core i5 2500k @ 4.8 ghz

According to benchmarks that I've seen, overclocked 5850s in CF are quicker in some games than a single 580 and not as quick in others. Crysis 2 with tessellation for example runs like garbage but Witcher 2 runs at a locked 60 fps with everything maxed (except for Ubersampling.)
 

Izayoi

Banned
Guys, everything someone says in regards to your specs if pure speculation based on Alhpa performance which is an awful indicator for how the final game will run. Wait until at least the beta before making purchases based off of what someone might think the game will need to run.
 
Alpha is the bare minimum requirement so it's a good way of seeing what they need to ensure they can play the game and how much more they need to invest. Beta will be the true test, for sure.
 

Sethos

Banned
Piggus said:
According to benchmarks that I've seen, overclocked 5850s in CF are quicker in some games than a single 580 and not as quick in others. Crysis 2 with tessellation for example runs like garbage but Witcher 2 runs at a locked 60 fps with everything maxed (except for Ubersampling.)

Yes, CF looks good on paper but when it comes to actual gaming, it's atrocious. Micro-stutter, Profile waiting, buggy hell. The 5970 could also, on paper, beat the 580 but mine couldn't even dent its armor. Yes, in some games it miraculously works fantastic but most of the time it's just awful.

Sorry to be a Debby Downer but my hatred for CF ( And in extension, SLI ) knows no bounds.
 
Giriath_89 said:
So stoked right now.

Super stoked.

I'm considering buying a 6990 for my new rig by the way, since I'll be wanting decent performance for a very long time until another PC title comes out that I care to max out, and I hate SLI/CF.
 

n0n44m

Member
Giriath_89 said:
Super stoked.

I'm considering buying a 6990 for my new rig by the way, since I'll be wanting decent performance for a very long time until another PC title comes out that I care to max out, and I hate SLI/CF.

6990 = CF ?
 

demolitio

Member
shagg_187 said:
Alpha is the bare minimum requirement so it's a good way of seeing what they need to ensure they can play the game and how much more they need to invest. Beta will be the true test, for sure.

I'm happy even if I can only play the game on low settings, but I'm sure I'll get medium-high out of it once I get to turn specific things down or off. Even on low, the game looks really good still so I wouldn't be disappointed as long as I get the definitive version of my favorite series. I'll take low settings any day of the week just to get 64 players with larger maps and more vehicles.

I'm taking a guess the console version will be like medium-low? Anyone that can only run the game on low on PC should still take the PC version in my opinion. Hell, the resolution increase alone will help out a lot.

Do we know what settings actually worked in the alpha? I know there was some differences but I heard the LOD was screwed up, textures were low, etc. Either way, tweaking in the beta or full game will help people out a lot.
 

Izayoi

Banned
demolitio said:
Do we know what settings actually worked in the alpha? I know there was some differences but I heard the LOD was screwed up, textures were low, etc. Either way, tweaking in the beta or full game will help people out a lot.
Everything in the Alpha was locked at low except for SSAO, motion blur, and AA/AF.
 

DSN2K

Member
Im not really worried too much about performance....Ive got 5770, X3 455, 4GB ram what I think will play the game well enough to my satisfaction, I run bad Company 2 in 1080p perfectly, I should be able to do Medium with some AF(4 or 8), no AA at 1080p most likely in BF3.

Modern games scale incredibly well, I'm amazed what my 5770 can still achieve.
 

Piggus

Member
Sethos said:
Yes, CF looks good on paper but when it comes to actual gaming, it's atrocious. Micro-stutter, Profile waiting, buggy hell. The 5970 could also, on paper, beat the 580 but mine couldn't even dent its armor. Yes, in some games it miraculously works fantastic but most of the time it's just awful.

Sorry to be a Debby Downer but my hatred for CF ( And in extension, SLI ) knows no bounds.
That's true haha. Waiting for new profiles is really annoying.

Thankfully I don't even notice the microstuttering.
 

Sethos

Banned
Izayoi said:
Doesn't changing the rendering mode to half-screen per card limit microstuttering?

Possibly but that doesn't fix all the games with so many different artifacts you can barely count them, limited performance due to CF and sitting around with your thumbs up the ass for weeks and months, waiting for either game updates, driver or CF profile updates to hopefully get a working game. The list of games I couldn't play, had severe performance issues with or had to wait for months for them to work smoothly is very long - Longer than the 'working fine' list.
 

Izayoi

Banned
Sethos said:
Possibly but that doesn't fix all the games with so many different artifacts you can barely count them, limited performance due to CF and sitting around with your thumbs up the ass for weeks and months, waiting for either game updates, driver or CF profile updates to hopefully get a working game. The list of games I couldn't play, had severe performance issues with or had to wait for months for them to work smoothly is very long - Longer than the 'working fine' list.
You guys are making me nervous about my decision to purchase another GTX 580 here before long. :(

F#A#Oo said:
Is it possible to still find a server for the orignal BF:Vietnam on PC?

Just found my disk... :D
Yes, it is.
 
n0n44m said:
6990 = CF ?

Oh yeah, right, it's one of those dual GPU cards. I forgot about that.

I'm not going to be buying anything until early October anyway, so by then I should know how well single GPU's should perform in BF3.
 

LowParry

Member
I'd imagin I'll be okay with my rig:

AMD Phenom II X4 940 3.0GHz
8 GIG Ram
5850 ATI 1 GIG


At least close to Med/High settings?
 

supersaw

Member
Sethos said:
Yes, CF looks good on paper but when it comes to actual gaming, it's atrocious. Micro-stutter, Profile waiting, buggy hell. The 5970 could also, on paper, beat the 580 but mine couldn't even dent its armor. Yes, in some games it miraculously works fantastic but most of the time it's just awful.

Sorry to be a Debby Downer but my hatred for CF ( And in extension, SLI ) knows no bounds.

Yes but when all is said and done and the Jesus profile is released nothing can touch it in terms of performance. Also if you want to game at anything higher than 1080p with all the bells and whistles it's really the only option.

With my 6990 I can always disable CF and still get the benefit of a single 6970.
 
Does anyone else not really need 60fps? I have a pretty average build, but I'd rather have all the bells and whistles on and get 40fps than turn it down to medium and get 60fps.

For me, the difference in fps (from 40 to 60) is less noticeable than the increase in graphical fidelity.
 
BF3Blog’s GamesCom Battlefield 3 impressions

Our new writer, Dieter, got a chance to visit the Battlefield 3 booth at GamesCom in his home town Cologne, Germany. He played Battlefield 3 on two occasions, and he let us know of his impressions of the game. Without further ado:

Caspian Border map was detailed, lush, and just awesome to play in.

Flags are close together, felt about the same distance as the flags in Harvest Day from Bad Company 2. The rest of the map was very big.

The close proximity of the flags, coupled with a lot of players and vehicles resulted in some tense action between the flags, like a melting pot of vehicles, soldiers, explosions and gunfire.

Outside if the flag zones, there wasn’t much action. But there is a lot of room for flanking, both on foot and in vehicles.

The game crashed once. My friend who played had it crash a lot more often.

Jets don’t feel slow at all, feel about the same speed as in BF2. Jets aren’t hard to control either — if you played BF2 and operated a jet with mouse and keyboard, BF3 is just as easy.

Controls and movement felt a lot like Battlefield 2, it definitely didn’t feel like a “Bad Company 3″ game by any means.

The graphics are awesome, everything is detailed and crisp. The forest areas with a lot of trees and shadows looked just as good as Crysis. Water effects were the best I’ve ever seen.

Destruction is back and looked amazing, although you can’t destroy everything (obviously).

The PC system was powered by two Nvidia GTX 580 cards in SLI.

Vehicles felt more responsive than in Bad Company 2.

Tanks are operated differently now, the MG isn’t on secondary fire any longer, you have to use the “1″ and “2″ buttons to switch between main gun and MG.

You can spawn in vehicles now, e.g. you can spawn in a jet on the runway.
Weapons felt more realistic than Bad Company 2. They’re less “violent”, with less muzzle flash. They felt, sounded and handled realistically (BC2 weapons are almost cartoonish by comparison).

There were a lot of weapons available from the get to and there are a lot of customization options, even if the player I used was a level 1 Private. They might have added more guns just for this GamesCom preview.

The game just felt like a proper sequel to Battlefield 2. I played Bad Company 2 the night before, and BF3 is totally different. There’s an atmosphere and feeling of war and combat that was in BF2 and something BC2 couldn’t replicate.

It felt full of BF2 nostalgia when, as soon as I spawned, I could see and hear jets dog fighting in the sky above, see tanks blowing up far into the distance, see teammates running around me towards a flag… Just those 5 seconds made me feel what I felt when I played the BF2 demo for the first time in 2005. Just “wow”.

http://bf3blog.com/2011/08/bf3blogs-gamescom-battlefield-3-impressions/

"The PC system was powered by two Nvidia GTX 580 cards in SLI."

I hope thats not a sign my rig has no chance playing at max...

CPU
Thuban 1090T 4GHz

Motherboard
Gigabyte 890FX UD5

Memory
8GB Kingston HyperX

Graphics Card
2x 6950 Crossfire

Hard Drive
120GB Vertex Turbo

Power Supply
Seventeam V-Force 850W

Case
IN WIN Dragon Rider

CPU cooling
Corsair Hydro 50

OS
Windows Seven x64

Monitor
40" Westinghouse VR4085DF
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
Deus Ex Machina said:
BF3Blog’s GamesCom Battlefield 3 impressions


weeeelp, that's that I guess. The rigs were indeed running 580 SLI, combine that with people experiencing slowdown and the game only being a couple of months away and I'm one sad camper.

edit : though I guess there's a very slim chance that the slowdown was cpu related and I have a feeling they didn't bother OCing their 2500k/2600ks in all those rigs so they were most likely running stock.

Bah who am I kidding I'm rationalizing out my butt...
 

Woo-Fu

Banned
My experiences with SLI tell me that that might not have been a positive in the performance column, particularly for an unreleased game.
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
Woo-Fu said:
My experiences with SLI tell me that that might not have been a positive in the performance column, particularly for an unreleased game.

Then why would they even bother with it for gamescom? Surely they know what their game is capable of, and if it can't use SLI then what's the point of the rigs? Most of the time SLI either works or it doesn't, rarely have I seen 1 gpu being utilized moderately->much more/less than the other.

Usually it's either : 1:1 ratio or 1-99% : 0%

edit : , from the slides below.
Ha2AH.png
, they probably have well implemented SLI support in the gamescom build. Again, otherwise 50% of the gpus they bought would've been thoroughly redundant.


sigh...tri-sli 580s here I come X_X
 

Soi-Fong

Member
Smokey said:
I need 60. I just hope they've been working with Nvidia to have SLI optimized around release.

I'm hoping Dice has the game optimized enough that the 580 GTX can handle everything on ultra settings and still keep 60+ fps.

Edit: 2 GTX 580s would be understandable, but I would lose all respect for DICE if three GTX 580s are required to run this in all ultra settings at 1080p and 60fps.
 

LordCanti

Member
SLI'd 580's are going to be overkill for this game, unless you're running a multi-monitor setup, or a really high res monitor (2560x1600 for instance).

Everyone else will be fine with a single video card. I fully expect the 580 to provide excellent performance @ Ultra, and at 1080p.
 

mr_nothin

Banned
Demize99 twitter said:
@RaulO4 Glint is based on the scope. Out a high zoom scope on a AR will give glint too.
Welp, I guess that helps get rid of long range AR campers =]

Also a pretty good incentive to keep playing after you've completed all the kits. It's like prestige but with actual benefits
Demize99 twitter said:
@chase7417 Yes, you unlock the other factions weapons when you complete a kit.
I would prefer they kept it team specific at all times but that's actually pretty cool.
 

Soi-Fong

Member
LordCanti said:
SLI'd 580's are going to be overkill for this game, unless you're running a multi-monitor setup, or a really high res monitor (2560x1600 for instance).

Everyone else will be fine with a single video card. I fully expect the 580 to provide excellent performance @ Ultra, and at 1080p.

Canti, say you're required to SLI 580s to get ultra setting and 1080p plus 60fps, I'm just wondering would you do it.
 

Smokey

Member
LordCanti said:
SLI'd 580's are going to be overkill for this game, unless you're running a multi-monitor setup, or a really high res monitor (2560x1600 for instance).

Everyone else will be fine with a single video card. I fully expect the 580 to provide excellent performance @ Ultra, and at 1080p.

SLI 580s are overkill for anything. One could argue that a single 580 is overkill. But for guaranteed 60fps with some nice AA options thrown in if you can afford it why not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom