Battlefield 3 CONFIRMED!

[shortylickens]

Dont care.
Battlefield Vietnam sucked.
Battlefield 2 sucked hard.
And Battlefield 2142 sucked so bad I thought it was an April Fools joke.

At this point I would settle for a graphics and physics update to Battlefield 1942.

 

[skulkingghost]

Originally posted by: shortylickens
Dont care.
Battlefield Vietnam sucked.
Battlefield 2 sucked hard.
And Battlefield 2142 sucked so bad I thought it was an April Fools joke.

At this point I would settle for a graphics and physics update to Battlefield 1942.

Thats why Battlefield 1943 is coming out

 

[Ackmed]

Originally posted by: minmaster

Originally posted by: TehMac
This is really exciting, but what did Ackmed mean in the other thread when he said

"It better have real WS this time"

WS=widescreen

he wants native WS resolutions with FOV adjusted and HUD proportional, i'm guessing

This is true. BF2 didnt have proper WS, the FOV was wrong, and you couldnt fix it. It was very annoying, as an early adopter of a WS LCD, it was a big issue to me. And has grown to be to many people. Some people have no idea its messed up.

 

[Gothgar]

Originally posted by: CrackRabbit
So if it will be released in mid 2010 that means it should be actually playable by late 2011.

:laugh::thumbsup:

 

[TehMac]

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: minmaster

Originally posted by: TehMac
This is really exciting, but what did Ackmed mean in the other thread when he said

"It better have real WS this time"

WS=widescreen

he wants native WS resolutions with FOV adjusted and HUD proportional, i'm guessing

This is true. BF2 didnt have proper WS, the FOV was wrong, and you couldnt fix it. It was very annoying, as an early adopter of a WS LCD, it was a big issue to me. And has grown to be to many people. Some people have no idea its messed up.

Ah yes, well I think (finally) the BF2 patch 1.5 is rectifying that.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Actually, I'm more excited about BF1943.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

YES. I JUST JIZZED MY PANTS. Hopefully BF3 will do hitboxes better than BF2 - that was a major letdown in the game. And hopefully it's release in a relatively bug-less form, with decent balance. But I can let all that slide if it's at least as fun as BF1942/2.

 

[thegimp03]

Cool...I think my PC gaming days will be over by then though. Free time to learn and put hours into games is decreasing by the day.

 

[Coldkilla]

Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer

Originally posted by: dougp

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Wow, what a letdown. I was hoping for something interesting. :frown:

KT

This - compared to the polish available between ArmA and CoD:MW2, this will be crappy at best knowing how DICE puts out games.

If you think ArmA2 is going to be polished you're in for a major disappointment. Have you played ArmA?

I've had to explain this many times. Arma was released in its alpha stages. Bohemia's created the game with a very small team with a very small budget. They would have had to go bankrupt if they didn't release the game when they did. Arma is now almost an entirely rebuilt game with 1.15 and Arma2 only picks up from there and its success. Considering Bohemia is the only developer brave enough to be in this genre of FPS, I'm glad they did what they did to stay alive.

I'll probably end up playing Arma2 right through BF3. I was a huge fan of the 1942 series and played them for years... BF2 came off kinda kiddish and arcade to me.. With what they've been putting out recently, I can only expect BF3 to become dumbed down even more.. as if that were even possible.

 

[DannyLove]

Originally posted by: Coldkilla
BF2 came off kinda kiddish and arcade to me.. With what they've been putting out recently, I can only expect BF3 to become dumbed down even more.. as if that were even possible.

How the F did it come off kiddish and arcade like????? I must have missed the fact that it had WoW-type graphics...

 

[AzN]

About freaking time. I just want updated graphics. Faster jets and proper hit boxes.

 

[soccerballtux]

What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

 

[uclaLabrat]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

expansion packs? It wasn't lame, it was awesome.

 

[lupi]

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

expansion packs? It wasn't lame, it was awesome.

when there are so many different versions of the game out segregating the servers because the packs weren't compatible with each other, it was lame.

 

[Zenoth]

Finally, BF3, it might be something to consider, I'm still having fun in BF2 from time to time.

 

[GullyFoyle]

http://planetbattlefield.games...ullstory.php?id=158637

Update: Karl-Magnus Troedsson, Executive Producer of the Battlefield Franchise posted a message on his twitter again confirming BF3 is in development with no further comment.

 

[uclaLabrat]

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

expansion packs? It wasn't lame, it was awesome.

when there are so many different versions of the game out segregating the servers because the packs weren't compatible with each other, it was lame.

two versions is hardly an issue. SF and everything else.

 

[soccerballtux]

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

expansion packs? It wasn't lame, it was awesome.

when there are so many different versions of the game out segregating the servers because the packs weren't compatible with each other, it was lame.

two versions is hardly an issue. SF and everything else.

It wasn't that, it was that other people who paid $5 to get the rocket launcher could play in the same server you were playing in, but you couldn't get those rocket launchers. So in effect, they were paying to be more powerful than you. I'm not interested in buying another game where they're going to do that-- it's not the $5, it's principle. I have plenty of other games to play and I don't need to be jipped out of the $50 for $5 more because EA is greedy.

 

[Kromis]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

expansion packs? It wasn't lame, it was awesome.

when there are so many different versions of the game out segregating the servers because the packs weren't compatible with each other, it was lame.

two versions is hardly an issue. SF and everything else.

It wasn't that, it was that other people who paid $5 to get the rocket launcher could play in the same server you were playing in, but you couldn't get those rocket launchers. So in effect, they were paying to be more powerful than you. I'm not interested in buying another game where they're going to do that-- it's not the $5, it's principle. I have plenty of other games to play and I don't need to be jipped out of the $50 for $5 more because EA is greedy.

Really? There were more weapons to unlock besides the extra unlocks from SF?

 

[DannyLove]

Originally posted by: soccerballtux

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: lupi

Originally posted by: uclaLabrat

Originally posted by: soccerballtux
What if they do that lame pay more money and get the better weapons thing they did with BF2?

expansion packs? It wasn't lame, it was awesome.

when there are so many different versions of the game out segregating the servers because the packs weren't compatible with each other, it was lame.

two versions is hardly an issue. SF and everything else.

It wasn't that, it was that other people who paid $5 to get the rocket launcher could play in the same server you were playing in, but you couldn't get those rocket launchers. So in effect, they were paying to be more powerful than you. I'm not interested in buying another game where they're going to do that-- it's not the $5, it's principle. I have plenty of other games to play and I don't need to be jipped out of the $50 for $5 more because EA is greedy.

want more cheese with that whine?
All weapons had their pros and cons, no single weapon was far superior, especially from the expansion. The expansion alone along with the maps was worth the upgrade. If you didn't want to upgrade and play better maps and cooler guns, thats on you. Master your normal BF2 kit and you can take down anyone. I remember hearing this lame excuse so many times when bashing the BF2 series.

 

[AzN]

Not all SF weapons are superior but some SF weapons are superior for some kits. It is lame though that you need to buy SF to unlock better guns for BF2. I did the cheap route. Some guy in another forum unlocked it for me by playing SF with my account.

 

[Pollock]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Ackmed

Originally posted by: minmaster

Originally posted by: TehMac
This is really exciting, but what did Ackmed mean in the other thread when he said

"It better have real WS this time"

WS=widescreen

he wants native WS resolutions with FOV adjusted and HUD proportional, i'm guessing

This is true. BF2 didnt have proper WS, the FOV was wrong, and you couldnt fix it. It was very annoying, as an early adopter of a WS LCD, it was a big issue to me. And has grown to be to many people. Some people have no idea its messed up.

Ah yes, well I think (finally) the BF2 patch 1.5 is rectifying that.

Patch 1.5 STILL isn't out? I need that to see if it will finally stop crashing to desktop for me.

 

[Xylitol]

nothing compared to mw2. if it's as good as mw1 was, i won't be putting it down for some other shooter

 

[zerocool84]

Originally posted by: Xylitol
nothing compared to mw2. if it's as good as mw1 was, i won't be putting it down for some other shooter

You can't even compare the two games. MW doesn't have any vehicles whatsoever and all the maps are close quarters. BF games have been about larger maps with different vehicles to play with and being able to fly.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Will BF3 allow for custom maps, custom content, and auto-download? Will it be infested with nasty DRM? Will it get consolized?

It's hard to get excited about a new game these days with those issues looming in the background over every game.