• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

BF3 smacks down COD

A

Arsinek

Senior member
I think its official BF just put the smack down on COD.

Im sure the BF fanboys will say BF has always put the smack down on COD but to that all I can say is BFBC2 wasnt even worth playing to me, lousy controls and sloppy game play.

But in BF3 they figured out how to do prone properly, unlike their dolphin diving fiasco of the past. And you can now run and look to the side, unlike BC2. Also, Im not sure if its just me being happy with the movement controls and letting that happiness spill over but it seems like the guns and shooting is crisper.

Seems the main problems right now have more to do with buggyness of the servers, getting kicked from games or dropped or whatever. I havent been having any problems with it but my friend gets kicked at the end of every second game, then he has to restart the game and rejoin the server. Hopefully this stuff gets sorted out.

But overall I say job well done Dice.
 
Back in the day there was a great FPS called Tribes2.
You wanted to find a match, you connected to the master server, found a map you wanted to play on, made sure that there was space, and clicked enter.

Today it's all a buggy integration with my web browser.

The gaming clan I play with has a MF3 server up. Supposedly they have reserved slots for us, but that appears to be buggy. Last night I tried to join the server and found it was all full. I messed around with the settings and contacted the admin of the server. He couldn't kick anyone out of the server manually to give me a slot.

Last night reminded me on how much I miss the simpler days of gaming.
 
Agreed. The game owns... I just wish it ran better on current day hardware. It's definitely a better FPS in terms of infantry combat than any of the previous Battlefield games. Map design is absolutely top notch.
 
So to beat COD they had to become more like it? How many maps in BF3 are really the huge, vehicle-loaded maps that the Battlefield series is known for? I don't have the game yet, but from what I understand there are only 3 maps like that. The rest are smaller and COD-style crap like Op Metro. Even the large map I tried in the beta, Caspian Border, I found to be dull and uninspired. I'll wait for this game to hit $30.
 
From what I've read the game dynamics and graphics have been consolized and the much promised superior PC graphics didn't materialize. What a surprise, EA lying and making promises they never intend to keep. Not that I can blame them, even when the critics gave Duke Nukem the worst possible reviews idiots bought the game. At least COD doesn't pretend to be something its not and Acitivision isn't out to become the sleazebag monopoly of the gaming world. I'll stick with Steam for now and leave Origin to those deserving people who demand the lowest common denominator.
 
Last edited:
wuliheron said:
From what I've read the game dynamics and graphics have been consolized and the much promised superior PC graphics didn't materialize. What a surprise, EA lying and making promises they never intend to keep. Not that I can blame them, even when the critics gave Duke Nukem the worst possible reviews idiots bought the game. At least COD doesn't pretend to be something its not and Acitivision isn't out to become the sleazebag monopoly of the gaming world. I'll stick with Steam for now and leave Origin to those deserving people who demand the lowest common denominator.
Click to expand...
Pretty much everything in this post, but the exact opposite.

That's about how I feel.
 
wuliheron said:
From what I've read the game dynamics and graphics have been consolized and the much promised superior PC graphics didn't materialize. What a surprise, EA lying and making promises they never intend to keep. Not that I can blame them, even when the critics gave Duke Nukem the worst possible reviews idiots bought the game. At least COD doesn't pretend to be something its not and Acitivision isn't out to become the sleazebag monopoly of the gaming world. I'll stick with Steam for now and leave Origin to those deserving people who demand the lowest common denominator.
Click to expand...
...Have you played the game? lol

"I've read some hearsay, and you know what?! I agree with it!"
 
I missed all the preorder goodness. Facepalm.

Is it worth putting down the full $60 or should I hold out and pray for a sale of some sort?
 
OILFIELDTRASH said:
I missed all the preorder goodness. Facepalm.

Is it worth putting down the full $60 or should I hold out and pray for a sale of some sort?
Click to expand...

I was skeptical but a buddy was super pumped. Picked it up from Gamestop and I must say. I'm very impressed with the game play. Worth my 60 bucks. Its a nice change of pace from cod but still leaves that shooter familiarity. I like that there is no run and gun though. Think more if counter strike and cod had shooter babies.
 
You have to UNLOCK flares and missiles for the jets they don't come with them.......

That's what I heard, and that is just lame.
 
wuliheron said:
From what I've read the game dynamics and graphics have been consolized and the much promised superior PC graphics didn't materialize. What a surprise, EA lying and making promises they never intend to keep. Not that I can blame them, even when the critics gave Duke Nukem the worst possible reviews idiots bought the game. At least COD doesn't pretend to be something its not and Acitivision isn't out to become the sleazebag monopoly of the gaming world. I'll stick with Steam for now and leave Origin to those deserving people who demand the lowest common denominator.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should reserve your judgement until you actually play the game. Saying the graphics are "consolized" is laughable. It's arguably one of the best looking games on the PC. For far this game has lived up to everything I expected from it.
 
dpodblood said:
Maybe you should reserve your judgement until you actually play the game. Saying the graphics are "consolized" is laughable. It's arguably one of the best looking games on the PC. For far this game has lived up to everything I expected from it.
Click to expand...

problem is, it is 60 bucks. is there a demo? Plus, I played some beta, didnt like the browser thing.

I will wait for reviews of both mw3 and bf3.
 
MrWizzard said:
You have to UNLOCK flares and missiles for the jets they don't come with them.......

That's what I heard, and that is just lame.
Click to expand...
You need 300 points in a jet to unlock flares, it takes about 3 vehicle disables (Not even shooting someone down, just getting them to half damage). It took me about 5 minutes, and I was shot down once.

Not sure about missiles yet.
 
dpodblood said:
Maybe you should reserve your judgement until you actually play the game. Saying the graphics are "consolized" is laughable. It's arguably one of the best looking games on the PC. For far this game has lived up to everything I expected from it.
Click to expand...

From what I've read Wuliburton is a dumbass.

With that said, I beat the singleplayer campaign, while I enjoyed it, I still think COD still has the upperhand when it comes to the funfactor/enjoyability of the single player campaign. If people complain that COD's SP campaigns are short, BF3's campaign is even shorter.

Yes, both games are pretty much on rail shooters, but COD does a good job with presentation and keeping you enthralled and entertained. A good example is in BF3, you get multiple loadscreens in between missions, and skipping music, but COD does a good job at pushing the narative with the in-between mission animations as the level is loading.

Second, the characters in MW are much more interesting and fleshed out as you play the game, so you are invested in them as the game progresses.

But I digress, who buys these games for SP anyway right? 🙂 As far as multiplayer enjoyment, graphics, sound, tactical and gameplay balance, BF3 can't be beat 🙂
 
Shmee said:
problem is, it is 60 bucks. is there a demo? Plus, I played some beta, didnt like the browser thing.

I will wait for reviews of both mw3 and bf3.
Click to expand...
Well, BF3 reviews are up, and not to pile on, but do you really need a review for MW3? The gameplay will be pretty similar to the first two, and still won't have dedicated servers for ranked play.
 
sigurros81 said:
From what I've read Wuliburton is a dumbass.

With that said, I beat the singleplayer campaign, while I enjoyed it, I still think COD still has the upperhand when it comes to the funfactor/enjoyability of the single player campaign. If people complain that COD's SP campaigns are short, BF3's campaign is even shorter.

Yes, both games are pretty much on rail shooters, but COD does a good job with presentation and keeping you enthralled and entertained. A good example is in BF3, you get multiple loadscreens in between missions, and skipping music, but COD does a good job at pushing the narative with the in-between mission animations as the level is loading.

Second, the characters in MW are much more interesting and fleshed out as you play the game, so you are invested in them as the game progresses.

But I digress, who buys these games for SP anyway right? 🙂 As far as multiplayer enjoyment, graphics, sound, tactical and gameplay balance, BF3 can't be beat 🙂
Click to expand...
Agreed. At the same time, I don't think Dice was really ever intending to truly compete with COD with regards to single player.
 
MrWizzard said:
You have to UNLOCK flares and missiles for the jets they don't come with them.......

That's what I heard, and that is just lame.
Click to expand...

QFT.

This game is all market appeal, and very little of the genius BF2 was. Unlocks in BF2: 2 weapons per class, unlocks in BF3: a billion useless ones, and a handful of absolutely necessary ones. Who the hell thought making flares and missiles an unlock would be a good idea...
 
goobernoodles said:
Agreed. At the same time, I don't think Dice was really ever intending to truly compete with COD with regards to single player.
Click to expand...

With all the shit talking EA threw around, I'm pretty sure they are trying to beat COD on all fronts, otherwise why bother making a single player campaign at all and instead dedicate all their resources into refining multiplayer.
 
Sentrosi2121 said:
Back in the day there was a great FPS called Tribes2.
You wanted to find a match, you connected to the master server, found a map you wanted to play on, made sure that there was space, and clicked enter.

Today it's all a buggy integration with my web browser.

The gaming clan I play with has a MF3 server up. Supposedly they have reserved slots for us, but that appears to be buggy. Last night I tried to join the server and found it was all full. I messed around with the settings and contacted the admin of the server. He couldn't kick anyone out of the server manually to give me a slot.

Last night reminded me on how much I miss the simpler days of gaming.
Click to expand...


It is overly complicated but luckily I havent had any problems with it.
 
goobernoodles said:
Agreed. At the same time, I don't think Dice was really ever intending to truly compete with COD with regards to single player.
Click to expand...


I could careless about the single player really. Maybe one day when Im bored Ill check it out. I buy games for the multiplayer.
 
BF3 is actually a lot closer to Black Ops than I ever thought possible in my darkest nightmares...in terms of infantry play, that is, as obviously there are no killstreaks in BF3 or any real implementation of vehicles in CoD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top