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

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

maniacalpha1-1

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,562
14
81
JTsyo said:
Think they could do it now, as long as you don't want realistic physics on the water flowing out. If you wanted to fully model it, I'm not sure.
Click to expand...

Semi realistic at least, that is, it would affect all the infantry and vehicles, killing anyone close enough to it that the moving water still has a lot of kinetic energy, or floating anyone near the edges as it starts to fill up, and then for the rest of the round submerged areas remain that way.

But there would be no need to have it, say, knock down buildings or anything.
 
minmaster

minmaster

Platinum Member
Oct 22, 2006
2,041
3
71
they could do all those things and more but their creativity has been held back by consoles. not only do they have to make the game so that it doesn't play sluggish on coles, they have to make sure they don't use too much network bandwith, within the guidelines for PS3/360 which are pretty strict from what i recall.
 
R

RavenSEAL

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2010
8,661
3
0
I just got the gameinformer issue, the graphics looks sick x.x

More coming later from me, maybe pics of magazine issue.
 
zerocool84

zerocool84

Lifer
Nov 11, 2004
36,041
472
126
One thing I didn't like that was said in the Game Informer article was that modding may go away. They said they're not shipping it with an SDK to easily mod it. I hope they find some way to keep the ability to mod in it since we know mods are still a very important part of a PC game.
 
M

maniacalpha1-1

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,562
14
81
The theories are that they are avoiding mods to sell DLC. Whether that's true or not, they ARE going to be selling DLC.
 
R

RavenSEAL

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2010
8,661
3
0
I love how in right in the middle of the article, in the interview with Patrick beach, he just flats out says he thought BC2 was going to suck and it's why didn't release any content for it til 8 months later.
 
minmaster

minmaster

Platinum Member
Oct 22, 2006
2,041
3
71
RavenSEAL said:
I love how in right in the middle of the article, in the interview with Patrick beach, he just flats out says he thought BC2 was going to suck and it's why didn't release any content for it til 8 months later.
Click to expand...

can you quote what he said exactly? that's hard to believe...
 
R

RavenSEAL

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2010
8,661
3
0
minmaster said:
can you quote what he said exactly? that's hard to believe...
Click to expand...

bc2ae.jpg
 
Z

Zargon

Lifer
Nov 3, 2009
12,218
2
76
saying it was 'a bigger hit than expected' is NOT the same thing as saying 'i thought it was going to suck'
 
GullyFoyle

GullyFoyle

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2000
4,362
11
81
Battlefield 3 Beta in October?

twitter.com/supportea: "The Beta of #BF3 will be expected in October."

twitter.com/SupportEA: "We expect Closed Beta"

twitter.com/SupportEA: "You are in the beta if you have bought Medal of Honor."

Keep in mind, this is not straight from DICE. Also, these statements don't rule out other methods of getting in to the beta, like pre-ordering Battlefield 3...

addendum:

twitter.com/zh1nt0/: "The announcement for the #BF3 beta will be communicated through our Official Channels. Not by any other channel on Saturday...."

twitter.com/zh1nt0: "To clarify: Any announcement on a #BF3 Beta will be made from our official channels. No ETA has been given for beta yet."
 
Last edited:
GullyFoyle

GullyFoyle

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2000
4,362
11
81
For those that always wondered why DICE is so tight with the info...Demize99 tells his opinion

We're evasive for two reasons:

1) Somethings aren't decided, or are just planned and not done. Announcing something and then having it change down the road is difficult to explain, we'd rather stay quiet until we're done.

2) Even if everything was done, dusted, and decided we want people to be anticipating the game right up to launch. If we told everything we knew now it would be in the press the next day and after a month it would be old news. It would then be impossible to get the press, the public, and the gamers excited about the game when it was time for it to actually come out. We want people to play the game, lots of them, after all the more people who play the more people you all have to shoot in the face. It's a proven strategy that increases audience participation.
Click to expand...
 
M

maniacalpha1-1

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,562
14
81
Right now though a lot of this is negative hype and fear. Everyone wants things like commo rose and no 3D spotting, just confirming those 2 things could go a long way to make it feel like a true BF sequel and they'd still have a lot of details to hold in reserve.

But since they have not confirmed it, I'm afraid they will continue with the castrated-functionality Social button instead of commo rose, and that wallhack 3d spotting will continue as well.
 
GullyFoyle

GullyFoyle

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2000
4,362
11
81
maniacalpha1-1 said:
Right now though a lot of this is negative hype and fear. Everyone wants things like commo rose and no 3D spotting, just confirming those 2 things could go a long way to make it feel like a true BF sequel and they'd still have a lot of details to hold in reserve.

But since they have not confirmed it, I'm afraid they will continue with the castrated-functionality Social button instead of commo rose, and that wallhack 3d spotting will continue as well.
Click to expand...

I am fine with the Q button. One click is easier than two.
Let then add a Commo Rose or additional button(s), on top of it.
 
M

maniacalpha1-1

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2010
3,562
14
81
GullyFoyle said:
I am fine with the Q button. One click is easier than two.
Let then add a Commo Rose or additional button(s), on top of it.
Click to expand...

If they want to, in addition to the the commose, allow people to map a social button like BC2 that does only those minimum things that it did in BC2, they should. But the commo rose does more, it lets you give scripted messages like Thanks, Follow me, I need a ride, etc. BC2 does not let you say Thanks, Follow me, etc, it does let you ask for rides but it is in such a subtle and low key manner that you can hardly blame anyone for not hearing it.

So they need to do both for those who can't hold Q and slide their mouse.

Granted they should also let people suppress the auditory messages that come from the commo rose, AND the commander, if there is a commander.
 
Last edited:
GullyFoyle

GullyFoyle

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2000
4,362
11
81
What do they mean when they say BF3 is a spiritual successor to BF2, not BC2?

snaileri said: "And the worst part is that the designers don't acknowledge their failure.
If you'd go now and ask their own opinion about if they succeeded with the PC chopper flight mechanics, they would still say that they are happy with what they made."

Our goal with the BC2 flight mechanics was to create an easy to pickup and fly flight model. We did just that and thus I feel like we succeeded. We achieved what we set out to create, and it was well received by many players who previously could not have a flying experience in Battlefield.

The flight physics are actually a great example of why BF3 is a sequel to BF2 and part of the Core Battlefield Franchise. The prevailing design philosophy of the Battlefield Core has always been Easy to Use, Difficult to Master. Bad Company had greater emphasis on Easy To Use. We're approaching BF3 with an emphasis on Difficult to Master, and that Design Philosophy is prevalent throughout all parts of BF3. I've learned a lot from working on Bad Company, I'm convinced it's possible to maintain the incredibly deep game play of Battlefield without putting off new gamers. And it's incredibly important we keep that depth.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom