• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Battlefield 3 News Thread of BE ADVISED: Reviews On Monday

Status
Not open for further replies.

LordCanti

Member
May 8, 2011
15,211
0
590
The Burbs
What if they...what if they start the beta DURING gamescom....

I don't know if my body is ready.

(I realize it doesn't end in early September)


For people that have pre-ordered BF3 on Origin: Did you receive an e-mail about being in the beta, or anything? Just curious (I've received no such e-mail).
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
Menelaus said:
So has game pad support with no assist been confirmed before this tweet? Hadn't heard anything definitive.

http://i.imgur.com/62Aka.jpg[IMG][/QUOTE]
They need to remove the hit marker as well. It has little to do with gamepad support but they should still remove it.
 

MGHA

Member
Oct 11, 2006
1,340
519
1,425
California.
LordCanti said:
What if they...what if they start the beta DURING gamescom....

I don't know if my body is ready.

(I realize it doesn't end in early September)


For people that have pre-ordered BF3 on Origin: Did you receive an e-mail about being in the beta, or anything? Just curious (I've received no such e-mail).


Yes I got an email today about having "priority" access in the beta.

edit "You'll get to check out our progress for yourself in the Open Beta coming this fall, and you will have priority access."
 

Manager

Member
Jul 9, 2006
10,792
0
0
Sweden
Have you guys gotten anything in the mail besides these priorities things, like stuff that was for non-alpha users? I signed up for the BF newsletter, I've verified my e-mail, but I don't get anything at all.

I got a code (from another person, I didn't get in myself) to get in the alpha, which I registered through Origin, but I never got any mail about the ending of it either. Obv I am hoping I'll get to play beta early thanks to that code, but I guess that isn't happening.
 

Menelaus

Banned
May 6, 2009
7,476
0
0
LordCanti said:
What if they...what if they start the beta DURING gamescom....
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
Jul 4, 2004
35,710
0
0
vidal said:
They need to remove the hit marker as well. It has little to do with gamepad support but they should still remove it.
That's been a franchise staple since 1942. Probably not gonna happen.
 

LordCanti

Member
May 8, 2011
15,211
0
590
The Burbs
Mendelevium said:
Yes I got an email today about having "priority" access in the beta.

edit "You'll get to check out our progress for yourself in the Open Beta coming this fall, and you will have priority access."

Hmm...I didn't get any e-mails like that. Maybe because I only pre-ordered the other day? Oh well, I'm certainly not going to pan...


PANIC!
 

Josh7289

Member
Dec 9, 2006
7,386
2
0
vidal said:
They need to remove the hit marker as well. It has little to do with gamepad support but they should still remove it.
No, because it's extremely useful to know when you're actually hitting someone.

Also if you're using a tracer + Carl Gustav setup in BC2 the hit marker is almost necessary to know if your shots are actually hitting their target or not.
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
Josh7289 said:
No, because it's extremely useful to know when you're actually hitting someone.

Also if you're using a tracer + Carl Gustav setup in BC2 the hit marker is almost necessary to know if your shots are actually hitting their target or not.
The hit markers are a crutch. One reason why 3D spotting in general is a problem is because all everyone is doing at the end of the day is shooting at a spotted target and firing until the hit marker pops up. The game would change for the better if people actually had to rely on instinct and skill rather than trial and error.

The hit marker in the FPS genre has and always will be a blatant appeal to those who want the game to be easier. I disagreed with it in Battlefield 1942 but with the presence of 3D spotting in BC2 and BF3, it is honestly no longer relevant.
 

Metalmurphy

Member
Jan 17, 2007
32,670
1
0
Portugal
steamcommunity.com
If the game was perfect then I would have no problems with the removal of the hit markers but lets face it, there's lag, there's hit box problems, invisible walls (this happened alot in the alpha, some walls were bigger then what was actually rendered and shots would hit a transparent texture), etc...

Hit markers helps with these problems, it wouldn't turn the game for the better without them.
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
I'm not buying that reasoning. I'll just say this, I've been playing BC2 and it's laughable how much hit markers just makes the game trial and error.

Spotted enemy in some foliage that you otherwise don't see? yaominglolface.jpg Just keep firing into nothingness until the hit marker pops up. Oh, it popped up. Got that guy. Easy.

On the mounted/tank MG? Shots not hitting? Just fire around the guy until the hit marker pops up. Oh, it popped up. He's down. Easy.

I just think of how easier Rush mode would be for Attackers if Defenders had no idea if their shots were truly hitting.
 

Cuban Legend

Member
Sep 24, 2009
6,381
0
955
in my house
smallformfactor.net
Stallion Free said:
No destruction in that.
-The topic wasn't talking about hitmakers in relation to destruction, the thread's current topic is speaking about the implications of removing the hit markers themselves and the implications of gameplay variation that would stem from such change,

-The point is a very well developed and supported game mod exists out there and if any of you are PC Battlefield fans, you can freely install it an play it for free of charge because as a mod for BF2.
 

Xux

Member
May 10, 2007
4,655
10
1,145
Seattle.
Jeeze, expedited shipping on Origin is $15.99 while release date shipping on Amazon is 99 cents. Damn, do I really need to play it right on October 25th?
 

Cuban Legend

Member
Sep 24, 2009
6,381
0
955
in my house
smallformfactor.net
vidal said:
But you don't understand, I'm laughing about it.
laughing? you are openly complaining about it, QQing, crying, etc.

Besides, If you play any modern FPS and you will note the inclusion of hit markers. Why?

It's nothing related to pad support or anything of the sort. It's a matter of perception of the feature's role in an FPS by the developers.

I'm not saying they aren't a crutch, they just aren't percieved by game developers to be a crutch, otherwise you'd have the option to remove them alongside aim assist as pad options.
 

Uriah

Member
Apr 12, 2011
2,801
0
0
Sethos said:
Project Reality on Frostbite 2.0?

I would become a chronic masturbator.

Just throwing it out there.

It will be awesome when fans decide to make a new version of Project Reality using Frostbite 2. Wait . . .
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
Cuban Legend said:
-The topic wasn't talking about hitmakers in relation to destruction, the thread's current topic is speaking about the implications of removing the hit markers themselves and the implications of gameplay variation that would stem from such change,
The original point I made was that 3D spotting made hit markers less relevant. There is no 3D spotting in Project Reality. There is 3D spotting (and destruction) in BF3. I feel 3D spotting is enough assistance to the player without the hit markers. As it was said earlier, Digital Illusions won't remove it. They should though because laughing at some guy who thought he was safe in the bushes before I took him down due to trial and error hit markers is not how you want to approach Battlefield. Let me add, I did plenty of laughing in BC2 and it seems BF3 will be no different.

Edit: To add again, it's funny because it makes the game easy.
 

bumclot

Member
Mar 20, 2010
388
0
0
NoVA
vidal said:
The hit markers are a crutch. One reason why 3D spotting in general is a problem is because all everyone is doing at the end of the day is shooting at a spotted target and firing until the hit marker pops up. The game would change for the better if people actually had to rely on instinct and skill rather than trial and error.

The hit marker in the FPS genre has and always will be a blatant appeal to those who want the game to be easier. I disagreed with it in Battlefield 1942 but with the presence of 3D spotting in BC2 and BF3, it is honestly no longer relevant.
Couldn't you just play hardcore?
 

Cuban Legend

Member
Sep 24, 2009
6,381
0
955
in my house
smallformfactor.net
vidal said:
The original point I made was that 3D spotting made hit markers less relevant. There is no 3D spotting in Project Reality. There is 3D spotting (and destruction) in BF3. I feel 3D spotting is enough assistance to the player without the hit markers. As it was said earlier, Digital Illusions won't remove it. They should though because laughing at some guy who thought he was safe in the bushes before I took him down due to trial and error hit markers is not how you want to approach Battlefield.
3D Spotting it's as prevalent as you make it out to be.

If it bothers you and Project Reality isn't good enough an answer to your wanting a good experience without it then you don't even need to leave BF3 to enjoy a game without 3D Spotting, Play Hardcore.
 

Menelaus

Banned
May 6, 2009
7,476
0
0
vidal would have a point, maybe, if he wasn't talking about battlefield.

Been this way forever. Gonna stay this way forever. Don't like it, take it to a mod like PR.
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
bumclot said:
Couldn't you just play hardcore?
See, that's the irony of hardcore. There are still hit markers in hardcore. So, I'm inclined to believe the earlier post that hit markers are there for lag.

Cuban Legend said:
3D Spotting it's as prevalent as you make it out to be.
Oh, believe me, I make it prevalent. I spot almost everything I see.

Edit: And you know, I'd believe the whole, "It's a staple" thing, but we're talking about the developers who removed prone from BC2 because it was a balance issue.
 

rar

Member
Aug 12, 2009
1,358
0
0
vidal said:
The hit marker in the FPS genre has and always will be a blatant appeal to those who want the game to be easier. I disagreed with it in Battlefield 1942 but with the presence of 3D spotting in BC2 and BF3, it is honestly no longer relevant.

i don't think that's why hit markers exist. there are actual gameplay implications to them. it gives more information to the player, and it removes confusion, uncertainty, and guesswork from the game which can speed up gameplay alot. what skill is there in not knowing if you actually damaged a target? it just forces you to play less aggressively and more cautiously, which isn't making it any harder, it's just changing the style of play. quake, the most competitive fps ever made, has damage indicators, and the gameplay is better for it.

i can understand arguing against them based on what kind of gameplay you think battlefield should have or your view on how realistic the game should be, though
 

Izayoi

Banned
Jul 25, 2010
18,053
0
0
InfectedZero said:
Just curious, any particular reason why there is no crosshair for the machine gunner and there is for the tank driver? I assume balance?
Was there not a crosshair for the main gunner in the LAV? I know the side ports didn't have a crosshair, but I was almost positive that the main gunner did.
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
rar said:
what skill is there in not knowing if you actually damaged a target?
It separates the guy who has familiarity over the weapon he's using from the guy who's just shooting at something waiting for some indicator to help him out. Counter-Strike (and every Valve FPS for that matter) is the go-to example of a FPS that is just fine, if not much better, without the hit marker. The skill gap is pretty much defined as those who know are familiar with recoil and bullet spread and those who aren't. Those who are familiar don't have to rely on guesswork. Battlefield however, isn't Counter-Strike. At the same time, Battlefield isn't Call of Duty and I agree with you that the presence of hit markers speeds up gameplay and that's fine when it comes to a game like Call of Duty, but Battlefield? I'm not too sure about speeding up the game but again, I feel 3D spotting is enough for players.
 

Izayoi

Banned
Jul 25, 2010
18,053
0
0
vidal said:
At the same time, Battlefield isn't Call of Duty and I agree with you that the presence of hit markers speeds up gameplay and that's fine when it comes to a game like Call of Duty, but Battlefield?
Hit indicators have been in the Battlefield series from the very first game, which came out almost two years before the first Call of Duty game, so...
 

NBtoaster

Member
Aug 3, 2010
8,654
2
800
vidal said:
It separates the guy who has familiarity over the weapon he's using from the guy who's just shooting at something waiting for some indicator to help him out. Counter-Strike (and every Valve FPS for that matter) is the go-to example of a FPS that is just fine, if not much better, without the hit marker.

TF2 has optional damage sounds instead (and numerical damage markers) that make the game much better. It's good to know how much you've hurt the enemy so you can plan your next move.
 

Izayoi

Banned
Jul 25, 2010
18,053
0
0
No email, despite my using the Alpha tester offer to get the pre-order and the free game.

InfectedZero said:
There is for the main gun /driver, not the secondary gunner.
Huh, interesting.
 

Makoto

Member
Oct 1, 2010
4,236
3
670
Izayoi said:
Hit indicators have been in the Battlefield series from the very first game, which came out almost two years before the first Call of Duty game, so...
There's a technicality with this. When Battlefield 1942 was first released, there were no hit markers. Hit markers didn't come to Battlefield 1942 until patch 1.2 but yes, I'll agree that they were there at the beginning of the franchise.
 

Norml

Member
Mar 15, 2007
4,740
0
0
Asgaro said:
Since trees don't seem to disappear, I kept waiting for him to knock one down then make a hole under it and have cover:)

Places in BFBC2 where ground deformation works really good for me is where buildings are standing just a bit above ground,you can dig a nice hole and go under it to hide for spawning teammates,works real good on Laguna Presa:)And any spots where you have the high ground, like the nice sniper hill on Heavy Metal you dig a hole so only your head is peaking.
 

mr_nothin

Banned
Sep 1, 2005
11,126
0
0
35
Georgia, USA
I've never really liked hit markers. As long as there's blood and the characters react then I know I'm hitting them. What I REALLY dont get is hit markers in SP...wtf

Never had any problems knowing whether or not I hit someone in CSS. CSS is still the model fps for me. =]

ColonialRaptor said:
There was a crosshair for me when I was the secondary gunner... and also any of the side port gunners as well!
I remember the 2ndary gunner having the crosshairs but not the side gunners.
 
Dec 28, 2008
19,767
0
0
UK.
I like hit markers a lot. In BC2 I don't often get the sense I'm really hitting someone, even when I am, so it's nice to have a hit marker for an added sense of impact.
 

Sethos

Banned
Apr 9, 2009
18,138
0
0
Denmark
Finally decided to pull the trigger on my PC 'upgrade' to finally get some stability when playing, so now I'm ready. Hopefully I can at least get everything on Very High and a bit of AA at 60FPS+
 

mr_nothin

Banned
Sep 1, 2005
11,126
0
0
35
Georgia, USA
Foliorum Viridum said:
I like hit markers a lot. In BC2 I don't often get the sense I'm really hitting someone, even when I am, so it's nice to have a hit marker for an added sense of impact.
Netcode in BC2 is a load of shit. It's no problem in BF3 to know whether or not you're hitting someone. I also find hit markers for grenades/vehicles/c4 to be especially dumb. I think it would stop a lot of spamming. Those grenade throwing ammo sitters wouldnt have any confirmation as to whether they're actually hitting someone or wasting their time and I think that's a good thing.

Having hit markers isnt game breaking....just something I find a little annoying.
 

Kyaw

Member
Jun 5, 2010
5,558
0
590
Solihull, UK
Hit markers are fine, i like the tactile visual feedback.

I get the point that it makes you less skilled though.

It does make things easier as you can trial and error whether you are hitting a guy miles away with your silenced SMG...

The headshot 'tink' sound is even more important but that never works properly as i have heard that sound many times and never killed the guy with a headshot.

5 days to Gamescom EA conference!
 
Dec 28, 2008
19,767
0
0
UK.
mr_nothin said:
Netcode in BC2 is a load of shit. It's no problem in BF3 to know whether or not you're hitting someone. I also find hit markers for grenades/vehicles/c4 to be especially dumb. I think it would stop a lot of spamming. Those grenade throwing ammo sitters wouldnt have any confirmation as to whether they're actually hitting someone or wasting their time and I think that's a good thing.

Having hit markers isnt game breaking....just something I find a little annoying.
To be honest, after hundreds of hours in Call of Duty, not having a hit marker just feels jarring. The only FPS I don't miss it in is Counter-Strike, and that's because the act of shooting someone in that game already has so much feedback it simply doesn't need it.

If BF3 can match CS then sure, take it out, but if not, I want hit markers!
 

mr_nothin

Banned
Sep 1, 2005
11,126
0
0
35
Georgia, USA
Kyaw said:
Hit markers are fine, i like the tactile visual feedback.

I get the point that it makes you less skilled though.

It does make things easier as you can trial and error whether you are hitting a guy miles away with your silenced SMG...

The headshot 'tink' sound is even more important but that never works properly as i have heard that sound many times and never killed the guy with a headshot.

5 days to Gamescom EA conference!
I group them with those chime sounds that you find in Killzone 2/3 and Uncharted 2. They're satisfying to hear but they're a little cheap to me. If you're not paying attention then you should pay for it!

Like I said though, it's just a little annoyance of mine.

Foliorum Viridum said:
To be honest, after hundreds of hours in Call of Duty, not having a hit marker just feels jarring. The only FPS I don't miss it in is Counter-Strike, and that's because the act of shooting someone in that game already has so much feedback it simply doesn't need it.

If BF3 can match CS then sure, take it out, but if not, I want hit markers!
That's exactly my point though. We need more actual gameplay feedback in games rather than the interface/hud telling you. Just a little too in-your-face for me.

I think BF3's gameplay feedback is good enough to where it doesnt need it. They should make it an option at least. I'd turn them off so fast.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.