-
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
- Thread starter Anton Sugar
- Start date
- Status
Nostalgia~4ever
Banned
LordCanti said:
you can find more here
http://gamegpu.ru/Action-/-FPS-/-TPS/Battlefield-3-Alpha-test-GPU.html
Tallshortman
Member
Menelaus said:
How did BC2 beta compare with final release?
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
8xAA, 16xAFKyaw said:
RS4- said:
It's a random process. Not everyone gets it if it's his/her birthday.
Got that answer from 2 different ea support guys.
But for another problem they sent me to so called Tier 2 support chat, and I thought it wouldnt mind to ask it for the 3rd time, and they gave me a coupon code!
We're talking going from completely unplayable (5-15) to very healthy (40+), at least on my old dual core rig. If the same thing happens with BF3, I expect similar framerates on high in retail to what I was getting on low in the alpha (70-80 w/ a single GTX 580 and a i7-2600k).Tallshortman said:
Alpha performance was definitely all over the place.
I'm running AMD 1090t hex core @ 3.2. 4 gig ddr3 and a sc gtx 580 and even when it was over 60fps it still ran janky.
I don't think we can use the alpha as any kind of benchmark. The beta will be a much better gauge of performance but still nowhere near accurate enough. Gotta wait for a few patches after release for that lol.
I'm running AMD 1090t hex core @ 3.2. 4 gig ddr3 and a sc gtx 580 and even when it was over 60fps it still ran janky.
I don't think we can use the alpha as any kind of benchmark. The beta will be a much better gauge of performance but still nowhere near accurate enough. Gotta wait for a few patches after release for that lol.
Legato.Reborn-
Member
I wouldn't know BECAUSE MAYBE I DIDN'T GET A KEY TO THE ALPHA.
Tallshortman
Member
Izayoi said:
That's what I'm hoping for. That way I can probably get 60 on high on retail.
Dunno if it's old news but I just saw that tonight. EA are bringing a real Mig-21 to Gamescon for BF3's promotion...haha
Clicky for video
Clicky for video
Well, I'm pretty sure that the Alpha used a 32bit executable, so anything more than 6 or 8GB isn't really going to help. As for the processor(s), I have no idea how Xenons do for gaming. It could be that their archetecture isn't as well suited for the game as say, an i5 or i7.aperman said:
Izayoi said:
I thought the map was alright. Needs some tweaks in the beginning but it's hard to judge it with the squad spawning being broken 90% of the time. The real problem isn't the map though. It's the damn shitty players that never go after the objectives or just run in alone when they do and misuse the APC. The APC should be used to quickly transport a squad to the objective and then cover the MCOMM after it's armed.
I actually won a few times on attackers thanks to a team that worked together and listened to the APC idea. I don't think the map is all that bad when the players play it correctly, but some small tweaks need to be made in the beginning to assure it's a fun map since we all know that the players will never change how they play.
I just really hope the conquest maps aren't so linear and have points all over the map like BF2 which I'm sure they will. The problem with BC2's tacked on conquest is that the flags are all in a straight line with only 3 of them for the most part. One on U.S. side, one in middle, and one on the Russian side so it's extremely easy for people to camp the middle flag and make sure NO SIDE gets the point.
Real Conquest over Rush but I only really played Rush on BC2 because of the issues above.
ColeTheMole
Member
Old news. Some developer said commrose is build in but not yet planned for final release. :/
For anyone interested in lower-spec performance, here's my laptop:
Toshiba Satellite Pro L650-1CG
i3-350m 2.26Ghz
ATI Mobility Radeon 5650HD
4GB RAM
Min FPS - 20
Max FPS - 37
Average FPS - 29 ('Low' graphical settings at 1280x720 - external monitor)
Yeah, that framerate isn't exactly ideal but I still had a blast. It was more than playable compared to other games which perform similarly.
Toshiba Satellite Pro L650-1CG
i3-350m 2.26Ghz
ATI Mobility Radeon 5650HD
4GB RAM
Min FPS - 20
Max FPS - 37
Average FPS - 29 ('Low' graphical settings at 1280x720 - external monitor)
Yeah, that framerate isn't exactly ideal but I still had a blast. It was more than playable compared to other games which perform similarly.
The_Squirrel_Menace
Member
Also bought a 2600k and a gainward gtx 580 phantom in anticipation to BF3 hopefully I can play this game with steady 60 FPS, high quality with lots of action on screen.
Trench building. Holy shit.
Asgaro said:
It would be awesome if one of the classes could have something similar as an ability (something faster than forcing you to re-ammo four times). Trenches on the battlefield could possibly be awesome (or just suck).
Foxholes should be pretty quick to do though, will be interesting to see if people will do this.
NBtoaster said:
It was an easy and fast way of communicating, instead of just having one all-in-all button.
http://bf3blog.com/2011/05/bf3-wish-q-communication-command-commo-rose/
Almost fills me with rage when I read that, such a stupid decision. Communication and teamwork has always been important in the BF games, and DICE took that out of BC2 a little.
Horray, another way for ppl to just sit back and do nothing.Asgaro said:
Also, here's the LAV thermal I spoke of a while back, it's really helpful when looking out for those C4 bastards.:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Beefarar#p/a/u/2/m3-V1GpRqIA
This video also shows why attackers tend to lose so much. Look at that tent he builds in the 2nd half of the video. It's so glorious
- Status