**OFFICIAL** AT Battlefield 3 FAQ and News Thread

[maniacalpha1-1]

Link

Thanks...out of all that info, the only thing that actually gives gameplay clues is the 4 kits. They are really gonna drop us one tidbit at a time, it seems.

 

[minmaster]

at least in 1 tweet about decision to not include tracer darts in BF3, demize sounded like he wanted BF3 to not be like BC2. i don't get the hint that BF3 will be too much like BC2. we already got prone, 64 players, jets, bigger maps, etc...

 

[zerocool84]

at least in 1 tweet about decision to not include tracer darts in BF3, demize sounded like he wanted BF3 to not be like BC2. i don't get the hint that BF3 will be too much like BC2. we already got prone, 64 players, jets, bigger maps, etc...

Well there's some aspects I wouldn't mind having from BC2 in BF2. They just have to make sure to meld them correctly but keep the classic Battlefield feel to it.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

On those Neogaf forums that GullyFoyle linked, somewhere down the line they said commander "is in". But if they know that, why didn't they put it on the list? I wonder.

 

[uclaLabrat]

I'm actually loling at all the people in the UK forums bitching about 4 classes. I think 4 is great...they both have a good primary and secondary role, without being gimped. Kinda nice.

 

[minmaster]

first screenies!

http://www.ps3blog.net/2011/02/07/battlefield-3-looks-amazing/

 

[PieIsAwesome]

I don't understand why DirectX 9 is not supported. The consoles do not support DirectX 10 or greater, so if they are porting the game to consoles, Frosbite 2.0 must be able to support Dx9.

first screenies!

http://www.ps3blog.net/2011/02/07/battlefield-3-looks-amazing/

Not convinced those are shots from the game running in real time.

 

[minmaster]

it probably isn't... these preliminary screens look nothing like what we would get during actual game play. it could be doctored up, enhanced, etc...

BC2 preliminary screens looked amazing... the actual game didn't look anywhere like those.

so i'm not expecting BF3 to look like that during actual gameplay.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

That very last screenshot must be actual gameplay, it has what looks like an ammo counter. And there are some on EA UK BF3 forum that are asserting that that photo is evidence of 30 +1 in the chamber for ammunition.

 

[PieIsAwesome]

That very last screenshot must be actual gameplay, it has what looks like an ammo counter. And there are some on EA UK BF3 forum that are asserting that that photo is evidence of 30 +1 in the chamber for ammunition.

HUDs and game UIs are always added to pre-rendered videos or conceptual images to, well, demonstrate the concept of the game.

 

[Baasha]

GDC in March is when we'll be able to see some actual footage I think.... especially since they will demo Frostbite 2.

 

[zerocool84]

I don't understand why DirectX 9 is not supported. The consoles do not support DirectX 10 or greater, so if they are porting the game to consoles, Frosbite 2.0 must be able to support Dx9.




Not convinced those are shots from the game running in real time.

I'm glad they don't support DX9. PC games need to move on from that.

 

[scooterlibby]

yea i hope they adapt the gib system like RtCW. just pump more lead into them to make them unrevivable.

This would be so great. I miss gibs.

 

[Zargon]

I don't understand why DirectX 9 is not supported. The consoles do not support DirectX 10 or greater, so if they are porting the game to consoles, Frosbite 2.0 must be able to support Dx9.




Not convinced those are shots from the game running in real time.

because it would make the game shittier, rerendering the whole game. how old is dx10 now? its about time they moved on instead of wasting time supporting a gpu that would barely play the game anyways

 

[PieIsAwesome]

I'm glad they don't support DX9. PC games need to move on from that.

because it would make the game shittier, rerendering the whole game. how old is dx10 now? its about time they moved on instead of wasting time supporting a gpu that would barely play the game anyways

Except they are not actually abandoning DX9 and moving ahead. The consoles only support DX9, so if BF3 is going to be on consoles, then it must support DX9. They are still supporting the old GPUs in the consoles. So why can't the PC version also support DX9?

The explanations that I can think of are:

1. Features exclusive and essential to the PC version require DX10 or greater.

2. They are trying to increase sales of new hardware.

3. They are trying to force everyone to move up to Windows Vista or 7 to make it easier to iron out bugs and whatnot. Easier to support 2 similar windows platforms instead several.

 

[Maximilian]

I don't understand why DirectX 9 is not supported. The consoles do not support DirectX 10 or greater, so if they are porting the game to consoles, Frosbite 2.0 must be able to support Dx9.




Not convinced those are shots from the game running in real time.

Well to be fair the last DX9 GPU's were the geforce 7xxx series and radeon X19xx series, their performance on bad company 2 would be worse than awful today so for a future game with an updated engine theres no point in supporting them.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Full Scans of the Game Informer article. Full Text.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

They couldn't be more wrong about the commander. Just because statistically people don't use it in every round doesn't mean that they need to "lower the threshold" to make it easier for people to use it.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Well, I did my first read through of the GI article, and I learned a lot less than I thought I would. It was supposed to have details on the multiplayer game modes. If it did, I missed it. I only found a few things to add to the FAQ.

Definately sounds like the Commander position is out. But, it sounds like they have some ideas about squads and possible command structure that they are keeping under wraps for now.

I liked Patrick Bach's discussion on prone, and that they will be doing something to balance it out vs all of the ground cover in the new FB maps that WASN'T in BF2 or BF1942. (man were those maps "sparse").

 

[Zargon]

ugh cant get to the scans at work

 

[GullyFoyle]

ugh cant get to the scans at work

I was concerned about that myself...

Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55

 

[GullyFoyle]

Hmmm...BF3 limited Edition for PC was $49.95 at the EA store, but it is now $59.95. It's also $59.95 at Best Buy, but still $49.99 at Amazon.

Perhaps an early price mistake at the EA Store?

Steam pre-order prices usually mirror retail. Might be good to order from Amazon, now.

 

[Termie]

Hmmm...BF3 limited Edition for PC was $49.95 at the EA store, but it is now $59.95. It's also $59.95 at Best Buy, but still $49.99 at Amazon.

Perhaps an early price mistake at the EA Store?

Steam pre-order prices usually mirror retail. Might be good to order from Amazon, now.

Actually, Amazon's product page says this pre-order is for the standard edition. It also says the retail price is $59.99. Something probably isn't correct here - either this is the regular edition that retails for $49.99 (and thus isn't discounted), or this is actually the discounted limited edition.

 

[minmaster]

i think all PC versions are limited... wasn't that the case with BC2?

 

[GullyFoyle]

i think all PC versions are limited... wasn't that the case with BC2?

All pre-orders, and all orders for the first month or so of BFBC2 were automatically Limited Editions. I believe at least all of the pre-orders for BF3 are LE, too.