• 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.

EA Battlefield 3 Special- New Footage of Graphics, Animation, Karkand, Weapons, Jets

Melville

Member
Ark said:
Do I get the girl with the game?


tumblr_lbnbh5N9Ej1qdoghio1_500.png


Oh you!
 

Ikuu

Had his dog run over by Blizzard's CEO
Norml said:
Rush is way better imo because of the objective for all to attack and be done with it once done.Conquest is just running back and forth to recapture or just stay and defend.
Rush is garbage.
 

Ark

Member
Stallion Free said:
It was better than the shit they called conquest in BC2, that's for sure.

Give me my SW:Battlefront 2 conquest!

Conquest with storm troopers > conquest with marines :(
 

Duffyside

Banned
Haha, oh wow, those two Dice dudes being interviewed together looked DEAD tired. Damn Riccitello the slave master, cracking that whip.
 

Ikuu

Had his dog run over by Blizzard's CEO
Stallion Free said:
It was better than the shit they called conquest in BC2, that's for sure.
Most of the maps in BC2 are terrible, some were alright for Conquest. BC2 just wasn't a great Battlefield game.
 

vanty

Member
duffyside said:
Haha, oh wow, those two Dice dudes being interviewed together looked DEAD tired. Damn Riccitello the slave master, cracking that whip.
Guy on the left looked like a fucking zombie.

Hope they actually use all the fancy lighting stuff for MP, doesn't have to be day and night versions of all maps but having early morning/late afternoon versions in addition to the standard midday setting would be good.
 
I have never bought a game like this....

... but this looks amazing. As long as I get to play both sides. None of this one sided view of contemporary warfare damnit

This is the best looking game from a technical perspective
 

Mr_Brit

Banned
vanty said:
Guy on the left looked like a fucking zombie.

Hope they actually use all the fancy lighting stuff for MP, doesn't have to be day and night versions of all maps but having early morning/late afternoon versions in addition to the standard midday setting would be good.
If this game has a true day and night cycle why wouldn't they have several TOD variants of each map so that every time you play the same map it will be set during a different time of day?
 

TheSeks

Blinded by the luminous glory that is David Bowie's physical manifestation.
Teknopathetic said:
Rush, barf. Although, I won't mind if the rush maps are just retooled Conquest maps and not the other way around. Conquest comes first, jank shit ass Rush should come fourth.


Teknopathetic
Now we can handle this like some gentlemen, or we can get into some old BINGO shit.

I respectfully disagree with you, Tekno. What are you going to do about that?

(USER WAS BANNED FOR DISAGREEING WITH A MOD)

MrBrit said:
>>Not all buildings being D 2.0'ed<<

Keep telling yourself that, Halo. DICE rewrote the engine for the purpose of not having that.
 

Majanew

Banned
Stallion Free said:
It was better than the shit they called conquest in BC2, that's for sure.
No way. Conquest is great in BC2. In Rush, players just stand back as a sniper and call in mortar strikes to bring the buildings down housing the crates. All it turned into. Conquest over Rush any day.
 

Stallion Free

Cock Encumbered
duffyside said:
Haha, oh wow, those two Dice dudes being interviewed together looked DEAD tired. Damn Riccitello the slave master, cracking that whip.
I bet if DICE was allowed to speak openly, they would totally say they regret letting EA buy them.
 
nelsonroyale said:
I have never bought a game like this....

... but this looks amazing. As long as I get to play both sides. None of this one sided view of contemporary warfare damnit

I often forget people care about SP in these kinds of games.

I wish they'd separate the two. SP and MP that is. I'd buy just the MP for a lower price tag.

That wouldn't work, you never want to connect to any server more than 300-400 km away.

Crazy talk. We have GAF servers for lots of games, and they typically are not anywhere near me. usually on the East Coast though, and that's fine.

Hell, the GAF KF server I run isn't even in the same state as me.
 

Mr_Brit

Banned
TheSeks said:
Teknopathetic
Now we can handle this like some gentlemen, or we can get into some old BINGO shit.

I respectfully disagree with you, Tekno. What are you going to do about that?

(USER WAS BANNED FOR DISAGREEING WITH A MOD)



Keep telling yourself that, Halo. DICE rewrote the engine for the purpose of not having that.
Do people seriously expect 100% destructability for every single building, if so you'll be very dissapointed come launch.
 

Stallion Free

Cock Encumbered
Mr_Brit said:
If this game has a true day and night cycle why wouldn't they have several TOD variants of each map so that every time you play the same map it will be set during a different time of day?
TOD = DLC.

This is EA, remember?
 

Stallion Free

Cock Encumbered
Mr_Brit said:
Oh yeah, I completely forgot about BC2's DLC 'support'.
Now you can play these maps in other modes even though every normal shooter does this on launch! But we call it free DLC so love us!
 
gregor7777 said:
I often forget people care about SP in these kinds of games.

I wish they'd separate the two. SP and MP that is. I'd buy just the MP for a lower price tag.



Crazy talk. We have GAF servers for lots of games, and they typically are not anywhere near me. usually on the East Coast though, and that's fine.

Hell, the GAF KF server I run isn't even in the same state as me.

In any game with decent hit detection and netcode the difference between a far away server with a large ping and a nearby server with low ping (that also doesn't have 47 isp's between you and it for maximum packet loss) is huge.

There is a reason why people have always spent 25-40 a month on clanservers in cs, so they could enjoy smooth consistent gameplay.

Have you ever even played at a lan party? The difference between that and 100ms of terrible latency is massive.

Our standards differ (a lot) I guess.

Let me clarify my first post: It's a lot more feasible to set up a few 16 player gaf servers for different areas than to try n fill 64 player servers with gaf people local enough to not turn it into a laggy experience.

But hey, it's battlefield, if they manage to deliver something of the same quality as 1942 and bf2 then the game will probably be huge enough on here and have enough legs to maybe keep 3-4 servers semi populated outside of peak hours.

That's a pretty big IF though considering dice's track record this gen.

A good 64 player server does not come cheap, so unless you are able to reap the benifits of that quality server I don't see much draw to invest in it.
 

Sanjay

Member
Norml said:
Rush is way better imo because of the objective for all to attack and be done with it once done.Conquest is just running back and forth to recapture or just stay and defend.

Conquest done right is amazing. Rush can get to a point of stale mate with countless deaths dying to campers who are dug in hard and well. Now if that happens on conquest, I'm off to another point where there are no snipers picking me off getting to the point. Conquest always keeps the game moving and fun.
 

Norml

Member
Ikuu said:
Rush is garbage.

I find conquest tedious. Once you capture a zone and leave, 2 minutes later you need to run back. Rush gives me a feeling of way more an accomplishment as the whole team is defending the parts.
 
SneakyStephan said:
In any game with decent hit detection and netcode the difference between a far away server with a large ping and a nearby server with low ping (that also doesn't have 47 isp's between you and it for maximum packet loss) is huge.

There is a reason why people have always spent 25-40 a month on clanservers in cs, so they could enjoy smooth consistent gameplay.

Have you ever even played at a lan party? The difference between that and 100ms of terrible latency is massive.

Our standards differ (a lot) I guess.

I'll play on anything under a 70ms ping. Living in SoFla you don't have a lot of options. I usually play on servers in Atlanta.

BTW, your post comes off as really douchey.
 

butts

Member
Everything looks so amazing but after the mediocrity of BC2 I am not even that excited anymore :\ They have a lot to prove.
 

Ark

Member
gregor7777 said:
I'll play on anything under a 70ms ping. Living in SoFla you don't have a lot of options. I usually play on server in Atlanta.

BTW, you post comes off as really douchey.

His post is fine..It's just you.
 
Ark said:
His post is fine..It's just you.

I'm not sure where he got the idea I was talking about playing on servers that had 150ms pings, as he implied.

<70ms ping is perfectly fine for battlefield-type games.

Have you ever even played at a lan party?

That's douchey. I know it's the Internet and all, but still.

Anyways, back to the topic at hand.
 
seriously, does nobody like both Rush AND Conquest?

i love them both! now that squad deathmatch thing... totally not Battlefield!

*throws Squad DM under a bus*
 

gl0w

Member
butts said:
Everything looks so amazing but after the mediocrity of BC2 I am not even that excited anymore :\ They have a lot to prove.

wow.. what? BC2 is still one of the best recent FPS. I'm still playing it everyday, with full games. It just looks amazing. I have no doubts that BF3 will be the next best FPS.
 

Effect

Member
I really hope they release some system requirements soon. I might just have to upgrade something again to get this running the way I want. I know I'll need a new tower or better fans to keep things cool.

I never got the dislike for BC2. The number of servers I see shows that it's popular. I much prefer that style of gameplay over CoD (do enjoy playing BO though). Rush mode keeps things very interesting, especially when sides are set to randomize. Conquest is fun but for me it depends on the map. Conquest game tend to go to long at times. Sometimes I can't finish them if I come in at the start of a new match.
 

Sanjay

Member
Stallion Free said:
Now you can play these maps in other modes even though every normal shooter does this on launch! But we call it free DLC so love us!

Guessing you must have stopped playing, the last VIP pack gave 4 new maps. Some thing other top tier shooters don't do. While its rivals don't even support their game past post release as there to busy making their next game.

Stallion Free said:
I completely lost faith in Dice's ability to do conquest anymore so I'm fine with Rush in BF3.

Something I don't get. Just use the old maps used in past BF games, people love them. Just bloody make them, take my money!
 

DenogginizerOS

BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
The Faceless Master said:
seriously, does nobody like both Rush AND Conquest?

i love them both! now that squad deathmatch thing... totally not Battlefield!

*throws Squad DM under a bus*
I like both. Go figure.
 
Top Bottom