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

[KayGee]

Forcing jets to land should be left in glacier-paced games like ARMA. I think having to fly by the airfield two or three times to rearm fully should suffice and of course, AA needs to be more effective. The fact that the AA shows up on the pilot's HUD long before the jet gets within AA range is just retarded.

 

[JTsyo]

After the knifing in BC2, jets are my least favorite thing in BF games. They had it right in 2142 with the VTOLs.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Forcing jets to land should be left in glacier-paced games like ARMA. I think having to fly by the airfield two or three times to rearm fully should suffice and of course, AA needs to be more effective. The fact that the AA shows up on the pilot's HUD long before the jet gets within AA range is just retarded.

Landing in Battlefield would not slow things down too much. As of right now a jet can rearm bombs and fly all the way back to it's previous target in an average time of I would guess, 30 seconds? Landing might make this 50 seconds. 30 seconds rearm time is so fast that many pilots don't even bother using their cannon to strafe after dropping their bombs. Maybe they would use cannon more often if they had to land for more bombs. Jet cannon are still powerful but they require a longer time pointed at the target and that balances things out.

There are plenty of other ideas besides landing though. For example, BF2 maps had usually 2 jets per team for a total of 4. Another great idea is to add a third jet but the third jet has NO bombs at all, only air to air missiles and cannon. This would encourage the third jet to actually try to dogfight enemy jets. The benefit of this is that TECHNICALLY, jets are not weakened and they don't have to make pilots cry by making AA more powerful. But it helps stop the ground troop rape by encouring jets to actually try and fight each other.

Also, you know how BC2 gives you points for seriously wounding armor? BF3 could give jet pilots points for seriously wounding an enemy jet, that way it entices pilots to dogfight more, even if an AA station KS's you by getting the final blow, you still got points for doing damage.

 

[GullyFoyle]

New trailer with mostly old footage...looks like a potential TV commercial...

Battlefield 3 - "My Life" Trailer (Actual Game Footage)

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Article from today on IGN:
"By setting Battlefield 3 in Iraq, and not some unnamed Middle Eastern country, it's clear that the game aims to stay real and current."

I though it was Iran? Never heard Iraq mentioned. http://pc.ign.com/articles/116/1161565p2.html

 

[GullyFoyle]

Article from today on IGN:
"By setting Battlefield 3 in Iraq, and not some unnamed Middle Eastern country, it's clear that the game aims to stay real and current."

I though it was Iran? Never heard Iraq mentioned. http://pc.ign.com/articles/116/1161565p2.html

The first Fault Line trailer opens with this blurb:

"Coalition forces led by US Marines continue pacification operations along the Iraq/Iranian border to restore stability to the region."

Also, Baghdad is mentioned as one of the game's locations.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Battlefield 3 to Make TV Debut During FA Cup

Battlefield 3 to Make TV Debut During FA Cup

Electronic Arts has revealed today that the highly-anticipated Battlefield 3 will receive its television debut this week, during the incredibly high profile FA Cup semi-final. The match between Manchester United and Manchester City will not only provide a tense derby tie, but will also showcase Battlefield 3 months ahead of its November launch.
Speaking to MCV, Colin Blackwood, UK Business Lead, Electronic Arts said: “We’ve had an amazing response from community and industry and we’re extremely excited to be able to show so much gameplay footage this early in the campaign."

Originally unveiled at the Game Developers Conference in March, DICE’s forthcoming Battlefield 3 is set to be one of the biggest videogames launches this winter, and in lieu of another Medal of Honor title will surely be Electronic Arts’ choice production to take-on the inevitable 2011 Call of Duty title. Electronic Theatre will keep you updated with all the latest details on Battlefield 3, and other forthcoming releases from Electronic Arts.

==================================================

I'm seeing postings and tweets from several people today stating that Amazon e-mailed them about their Battlefield 3 pre-order, stating that the game is now scheduled to be released on November 4th.

 

[GullyFoyle]

12 Minutes of Gameplay video released!

Youtube

Downloadable version 1080p @ 60hz (1.8 GB!)

 

[scooterlibby]

Ohhhh man that looks awesome.

 

[videogames101]

Visuals look excellent, like REALLY good. I just don't care at all about this singleplayer crap. Give me a trailer of the mp.

 

[minmaster]

seriously, some MP footage would be nice. who cares about all these scripted nonsense?

 

[dangerman1337]

MP won't be revealed until E3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_UvIcq2evr4&feature=feedu around 35.00).

 

[GullyFoyle]

Music from the My Life video - Awesome live version

==================================================

In case you didn't actually see it on TV, and were curious. The commercial.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Faultline 12 minute trailer with Commentary. Complements of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. on hardforum.

www.dailymotion.com

On Youtube

 

[GullyFoyle]

GamerSpawn Battlefield 3 - "My Life" Analysis
GamerSpawn Battlefield 3 - "12 Minute Gameplay" Analysis

 

[GullyFoyle]

So I just saw a tweet from Direct2Drive saying Battlefield 3 is now available from pre-order from them. I click the link and I was able to get to their site. Right on the side of the page is an ad saying 10% off all pre-orders for a limited time.

$59.95 - 5.99 = $53.96 If you like D2D, here is your chance to save a few bucks.

Direct2Drive

 

[GullyFoyle]

xboxer360 - Exclusive Q&A With Patrick Bach on Battlefield 3

Exclusive Q&A with Patrick Bach: Battlefield 3
Words by: Richard Berry
Posted on: Wednesday 20th April, 2011

We have an awesome Q&A for you guys. It’s with Patrick Bach, Executive Producer on Battlefield 3.

1. With the time between game releases getting shorter, what would you say to critics who believe the shorter times are stifling innovation and encouraging products which follow expected tried and trusted formulas?
Yes and no. I would argue that if you do have a clear vision on what you want to achieve and an experienced team you can actually plan for success. This could in some cases mean that you will use well known components in parts of the product and in other parts create completely new components. Everything does not have to be new to create a great gaming experience. In comparison with the music industry you do not need all new “never-used-before” musical instruments to create a new song but you do need some new components and a great idea.

2. With Multiplayer aspects becoming more prominent in games nowadays and with lots of stiff competition in the marketplace, how does Battlefield 3′s multiplayer aim to entice gamers?
Battlefield has always been a strong contender in the FPS multiplayer space. There is no reason for us to not be able to stay ahead in this area for Battlefield 3. Dice do have more than a decade of experience in Multiplayer FPS and most of the key individuals building Battlefield 1942 (released 2002) is still today part of the Battlefield 3 team. We are always trying to improve on the Battlefield formula and Battlefield 3 is no exception.

3. A lot of focus is shifted towards the multiplayer aspects of games but what of the single player options – what can lone players expect beyond the single player campaign?
We are not only focusing on the multiplayer experience but also making sure anyone can get into the game no matter your personality or mood. Lone players like you say enjoy the Single player campaign but can also, without caring about Teamplay or responsibility for others, just have a great time in multiplayer.

4. What are your thoughts on your rival’s products which look like shipping around the same time as Battlefield 3, do you think cross game rivalry is healthy and do you actually learn much from what the competition is doing and how well they perform?
Competition is always healthy to push things forward. I think everyone is evolving from a healthy amount of rivalry and it inspires everyone to try harder to give the consumer a better product. Worst thing that could happen is if games stopped moving forward and we see that as a big part of our mission. We all need to start moving into the next generation of FPS games and we will try to take the first step.

5. It’s been reported that EA aims to take the shooter crown from Activision and publish the top first person shooter for this generation. With Call of Duty performing so well, are you confident you attract the COD crowd?
From a developer perspective we are always trying to create the best game possible. We do believe that the Battlefield formula with a great Shooting experience as a core and including Teamplay elements, Vehicles and Destruction is the way forward for the genre. If we succeed in making the better game or not; we will still push the industry forward and that is a great win for consumers, developers and the industry as a whole.

6. What are your plans with DLC Content? Another VIP-Pass?
The only DLC we have announced now is the “Back to Karkand” pack that includes re-made maps, Weapons and Vehicles from Battlefield 2. If you pre-order the game you will get that for free.

7. The stunning footage of the game seen so far is supposedly from the PC version: when will you be showing some footage from the Xbox 360 version? And which differences can we expect from the PC version (aside the already known multiplayer differences)?
Our philosophy is to not to talk about things we cannot prove and this is true also when it comes to the quality of the Xbox 360 version of the game. All of the core game systems (animation, destruction, rendering, audio etc.) are the same on all platforms so there will not be a difference when it comes to the general experience of the game. Some technicalities will of course be different due to larger memory and the graphics cards you can have on the PC. We are trying to push the envelope of FPS games in general and this will be obvious in all versions of the game. Looking back to what quality we achieved with Battlefield Bad Company 2 last year we do know how to make high quality games on all platforms.

8. Battlefield has always been a multiplayer-focused franchise, then you created Bad Company for a more campaign-oriented, console-friendly experience. Now, with Battlefield 3 you seem to be mixing both philosophies in one single game: will both series continue to exist and develop independently?
We tried to give the Battlefield Bad Company series a unique soul of itself to not confuse it with the Core Battlefield series. We are hoping that that is obvious when looking at the material we have released so far from Battlefield 3. At the core they are both Battlefield games so of course there will be similarities but the tone and depth of Battlefield 3 will be fundamentally different.

9. We know the game will sport a co-op campaign, separated from the main one. Can you give us some details about it?How many hours should it take to complete?
We have announced that we will have a Co-op mode in Battlefield 3 but not what it will be. We will make sure we utilize all our Battlefield knowledge to create something really interesting in this area. Just wait and see.

10. Can you give us any details on soldier upgrades and weapon modifications?
No, cannot give any details at this time. I can tell you that it will not be less than in any of our earlier titles for sure.

11. Will the Onslaught-Mode feature in Battlefield 3?
See question 9.

12. Why is there 24 player limits on consoles? Is it engine performance or networking issues?
We always have to find the sweet spot between player count, visual quality, destruction, vehicles, network traffic and general game quality in all games we are building. In this case we are focusing on all of the above and have come to the conclusion that 24 players on the console gives us the right balance. We had this number in Battlefield Bad Company 2 and that worked pretty good we think. We still have more players than most other FPS games on console with the added value of vehicles and destruction that we are almost alone in having. We have seen some games trying to do more and not always succeeding since it is really hard to keep the quality of the experience when just adding more players. We are not worried that the intensity of the multiplayer experience will not be enough on the consoles even if we are pushing the numbers further up on the PC.

13. Base camping was sometimes frustrating in Bad Company 2 (Atakama Desert is good example). Are you planning to re-introduce “no points in enemy base” system in Battlefield 3? What about team kills?
This is something we are constantly looking into. We are trying to find the perfect balance in all out maps, game modes and kits but I cannot give any specifics at this moment on exactly what we are doing for Battlefield 3.

14. Will there be training mode (or something similar) for multiplayer, where players can learn how to fly helicopters or use other vehicles?
Again I cannot comment on this at this time. Sorry.

15. Will a demo coming before the release?
Yes!

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

"13. Base camping was sometimes frustrating in Bad Company 2 (Atakama Desert is good example). Are you planning to re-introduce “no points in enemy base” system in Battlefield 3? What about team kills?
This is something we are constantly looking into. We are trying to find the perfect balance in all out maps, game modes and kits but I cannot give any specifics at this moment on exactly what we are doing for Battlefield 3."

The important thing is that uncap attacks be confirmed allowed. With that said though, 95% or more of servers do not allow and in fact have autopunish/kick programs - how in the world can someone complain about uncap attacks in BC2 when the chances of the server you play on having such a thing are so high? Is it not enough for some people that such iron fisted macroadmin programs are tolerated by EA? I finally found a No Nube Rules Heavy Metal that allows uncap attacks, it's the only one I've seen so far. Population not suffering btw.

 

[JTsyo]

"13. Base camping was sometimes frustrating in Bad Company 2 (Atakama Desert is good example). Are you planning to re-introduce “no points in enemy base” system in Battlefield 3? What about team kills?
This is something we are constantly looking into. We are trying to find the perfect balance in all out maps, game modes and kits but I cannot give any specifics at this moment on exactly what we are doing for Battlefield 3."

The important thing is that uncap attacks be confirmed allowed. With that said though, 95% or more of servers do not allow and in fact have autopunish/kick programs - how in the world can someone complain about uncap attacks in BC2 when the chances of the server you play on having such a thing are so high? Is it not enough for some people that such iron fisted macroadmin programs are tolerated by EA? I finally found a No Nube Rules Heavy Metal that allows uncap attacks, it's the only one I've seen so far. Population not suffering btw.

Think base camping might be snipers sitting their spawn sniping. If you fire back, then you get punished by the settings you mentioned.

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

Think base camping might be snipers sitting their spawn sniping. If you fire back, then you get punished by the settings you mentioned.

You mean he's referring to people sniping out of the base, not into it? I usually call that "exploit-sniping from the uncap".

Actually, if DICE is going to allow these third party macro programs that autokick, they should at least force them to be consistent. If EITHER person is in the uncap then the person killing should be punished regardless of who owns the uncap. The person whose team owns it should only not be punished if the enemy he killed is also in the uncap. If the enemy he killed is outside of it, he should be punished. Now you might say that that's unfair to the team owning the uncap because of how close the uncap can be to the nearest flag, but poor map design is no excuse to permit glitching like that.

For example - if you are in the enemy uncap and you fire OUT of it to kill someone, then you still get punished. It should work exactly like that for the team that owns the uncap as well.

BTW there is a slight workaround for autokick programs if you are having trouble with chopper reliant sluts. If you can put C4 on the chopper, and both leave the uncap yourself and wait for the chopper to leave it, you can then detonate. That's not going to work more than once or twice per round on the same pilots though, especially with killcam, they will see what you are doing and confront you in the base forcing you to either accept death or kill them and accept the kick. Since you can only get a couple of kills before people catch on it's hardly earthshaking, but a good way to even out a chopper whore's ratio by a death or two.

 

[GullyFoyle]

Battlefield-online.net - Battlefield 3 Vehicles Shown in Xbox 360 Theme

While not exactly new to Battlefield, there appears to be new images of some of the vehicles in Battlefield 3 in the Xbox 360 theme posted about below. A couple of those (AA and Light Tank) haven't been seen before in any of the magazine features or trailers.

BF3_VE1 - BF3_VE2.jpg - BF3_VE3 - BF3_VE4 - BF3_VE5

 

[uclaLabrat]

"13. Base camping was sometimes frustrating in Bad Company 2 (Atakama Desert is good example). Are you planning to re-introduce “no points in enemy base” system in Battlefield 3? What about team kills?
This is something we are constantly looking into. We are trying to find the perfect balance in all out maps, game modes and kits but I cannot give any specifics at this moment on exactly what we are doing for Battlefield 3."

The important thing is that uncap attacks be confirmed allowed. With that said though, 95% or more of servers do not allow and in fact have autopunish/kick programs - how in the world can someone complain about uncap attacks in BC2 when the chances of the server you play on having such a thing are so high? Is it not enough for some people that such iron fisted macroadmin programs are tolerated by EA? I finally found a No Nube Rules Heavy Metal that allows uncap attacks, it's the only one I've seen so far. Population not suffering btw.

I don't know what servers you're talking about, but I think I've only ever seen 1 server with an autoadmin for basekilling, save for the 1 week we experimented with it on our server.

We don't care if you run into a base, kill a few people, and get out, with or without taking vehicles, we just don't want people to set up shop. This argument is about as overblown as snipers ruining the game.

 

[Zargon]

yeah he plays on shitty servers and blames the game for it

 

[maniacalpha1-1]

I don't know what servers you're talking about, but I think I've only ever seen 1 server with an autoadmin for basekilling, save for the 1 week we experimented with it on our server.

We don't care if you run into a base, kill a few people, and get out, with or without taking vehicles, we just don't want people to set up shop. This argument is about as overblown as snipers ruining the game.

Your attitude(just don't want people setting up shop) is actually close to a nice compromise. But yes, out of the 20 servers I've played on in the last 4 months, 16ish have the uncap autokick, 3 don't have the autokick but still have the rule and 1 allows uncap attacks. Obviously the autopunisher is ironfisted, you do it you die and then get booted. But the other three, have had active admins and the instant you even look at the uncap people cry out to them.

If you've only seen 1 server with the autoadmin I just don't know what to tell you, but they are out there. Of course, I actively basekill anyway mostly because I'd rather at least try and kill exploiters firing out of them.

 

[GullyFoyle]

It's a slow news day...

Battlefield 3: 'The console version looks so much better than anticipated'

21-Apr-2011
DICE executive producer Patrick Bach talks console technology, next-gen and Battlefield's competition...

2011's FPS battle kicked off with a bang when EA and DICE slammed some heavy artillery on the table in the form of Battlefield 3 .

Of course it looks beautiful, that's plain for all to see, but executive producer at DICE Patrick Bach tells us that the implications of the studio's latest military shooter go much further than a pretty face.

As DICE looks to the future, it's building Battlefield 3 with the next-generation in mind to create a game that will fulfil the potential of technology for next five years.

An exciting premise for sure. We spoke Bach about what that means for Battlefield 3, what EA and DICE are expecting to see in the next-generation and how the developer feels it's about to get one over the competition:

Battlefield 3 looks amazing from what we've seen but so far everything's been shown on PC. Is it going to look as good on console?
That's always hard to answer. We need to show pictures of it to make sure that when people see it they can judge for themselves. There are of course technical advantages with the PC. PC: brand new technology; Consoles: five year old technology, so of course there will be differences. Our job is to make sure that the core and the emotion of the game is exactly the same. We're not trying to build a lesser game on console. The interesting part is since we have the stretch goal of creating something amazing on PC, scaling that back to console gives us an advantage because we actually see stuff being run on the console today in Battlefield 3 that looks so much better than we anticipated just because we're aiming so much higher rather than trying to build a console game based on the competition or our latest game. We're building it aiming for the stars. We're seeing some really cool results.

How does the console version compare to something say or Uncharted 3 on console?
I'm not too worried to be honest. I think we will be, if not the best-looking console game this year, up there with the competition. Honestly we're not even trying to compare it, we're just comparing to ourselves right now because if we were to look at other console games I don't think we'd get the quality we are striving for. My goal is of course to prove it rather than talk about it, but I wouldn't worry too much because I think it will look amazing.

It must be pushing the consoles to the absolute limit...
Yes.

And I think you guys have talked about it being a next-gen experience on current-gen technology...
Yes.

Epic and other developers have been pushing the next-gen experience. Are we on the edge of this generation do you think? Are you guys expecting the next-gen soon?
I don't know what the big corporations are thinking but definitely we are desperate to move on into the next generation. I think Battlefield 3 will look like a next-generation game and all the technology we're building, the whole Frostbite 2 system the animations, everything is trying to aim for a couple of years in the future rather than looking at what we have today.

We are already there; if they were to release a new console tomorrow the engine would scale onto that platform because we have been looking at not only the PC technology today but also speculating what will happen tomorrow when it comes to these things. So everything from streaming technologies, rendering technologies is scalable onto future platforms.

And what kind of things are you expecting from the PlayStation 4 and Xbox 720 that you've kept in mind for this?
Well I think multi-processing is a must, everything we're building now is multi-tasking and we're really good at moving memory between specific memory and common memory. And, of course, graphics; HD will not go away.

But I think in general it will be more of the same but there will there will probably be new creative online features and that kind of stuff, which we are of course already supporting.

And what about things like 3D and, for the Playstation, Move capability, what's the status on that for Battlefield 3?
I don't have any status to give you at this time. There's a lot of talking going on about what we should and shouldn't support and we're trying to do what's best for the game.

When Battlefield 3 was first announced one of the things fans had concerns about was the inclusion of a single-player campaign. For Bad Company 2 the single-player was overshadowed by the multiplayer. Should fans be concerned about the inclusion of single-player in Battlefield 3?
No. Of course I would say no. I think the worry is that we would take people away from multiplayer to create the single-player and that's not the case. Our multiplayer team is way bigger than the multiplayer team we had building Battlefield 2 for instance. So, it's not that we don't put energy into creating the multiplayer. We have a lot of confidence in the multiplayer so we are pushing quite a lot to make it something amazing.

And single-player is something that we want to build, it's something that adds to the experience - a good training ground for a lot of people that want to try out different bits of the game. Et un seul joueur est quelque chose que nous voulons construire, c'est quelque chose qui ajoute à l'expérience - un bon terrain d'entraînement pour beaucoup de gens qui veulent essayer différents bits de la partie. We love a great single-player, for sure, as well as a great multiplayer so we want to include both. Nous aimons un grand solo, bien sûr, ainsi qu'un mode multijoueur, donc nous voulons inclure à la fois.

What would you say to the idea that, in military FPS games especially, multiplayer is bigger than single-player?
I think the whole kind of hunter/prey behaviour of people is quite deeply in your DNA so that won't go away. People want to show off that they are better than their friends or anyone out there, so that's a bit part of it. People want to play the sport of hunting and shooting so it's not that first-person shooters will go away from multiplayer, it'll probably grow even further.

But I also think that single-player will continue to develop because having a great campaign is something that people love to do, but the hours will be put into the multiplayer for sure.

Do you know, at all, what your completion rate of single-players in previous games is? Because I bet a lot of people buy FPS games for the multiplayer alone.
I don't have any good numbers on it. I think most people try the single-player at least and actually a lot of people finish the single-player. But I think the multiplayer component is so strong so if you start to play it you will continue to play it. We still have a huge amount of people still playing Battlefield Bad Company 2, even today more than a year after launch. So there's no doubt we have that strong... I wouldn't call it addictive but something you like to keep doing.

We see it as a sport; it's like the rules of football, they are set and now you find new ways of playing it.

Obviously the 'other one' is Call of Duty but EA's come out fighting almost, you seem very confident this time around. Is this the COD killer?
When we build a game, we're not even talking about the competition. We're inspired by media in general, we're inspired by a lot of things. When you're selling a product like an FPS of course you're looking who's around you, what's the competition and that's where that discussion comes from. We think we have the best game on the market, looking at last year reviews and also consumer feedback, we had the stronger game, that did not result in more sales, of course. So it's a question of sales vs. quality is it the same or is it different? Is it the marketing machine that sells copies or is it the quality of game that sells copies?

Our strive is to build the best Battlefield game ever and that's what we're going to do. We're not going to let ourselves get disturbed by the discussion of the fighting or who's better because that's not important to us because we are not building the same game; we are building Battlefield, they are building whatever game they're building. Let people choose. We think we have the best first-person shooter experience on the market.

EA said the competition's getting lazy and you're coming for them. Do you think there is a formula that the competition is using that you've broken away from and diversified a bit?
Not really, Battlefield has always been more or less the same formula, to us it's the winning recipe - don't fiddle with it too much. We should add to it and enhance the experience but we shouldn't change it.

I think the whole lazy discussion comes from, in general, technology. Everyone is building technology based on consoles rather than trying to move into the next generation and our engine is based on stuff that we've been speculating on for quite some time. When we started with it we thought everyone would be here - it's like the element of destruction that we added to Bad Company 1, we thought everyone would have destruction and still no one is doing it because they are still selling copies based on old stuff.

So I think the whole lazy discussion is based on the 'good enough', you know you only have to be better than your last game, you're not trying to envision the future or see where you ought to be. It's more 'Let's get stuff out there.' And I'm not talking about any specific game I'm talking in general people are building games based on old console technology.

Do you think that's a problem with the industry? That people are trying to churn things out? There are annual releases for things like Call of Duty...
Yeah. Of course there's always money and there are stock prices that kind of drive and change things but I think the goal for game developers should be to make that game and if you make a great game then people will hopefully buy that. There is a challenge between just making another game and making the game.

Having said that do you have plans to make Battlefield 4, 5 and 6 as well?
Oh no we're not planning on that. No, there are probably more strategic people that are thinking about those things. I don't know EA might plan for things like that but we are DICE we make games so we're focusing on the game we are building right now to make sure it's as good as possible and when we're done with that we need to evaluate the situation, see what people want and what they don't want.

If we're a success maybe we should focus on maintaining that success rather than building a new game. If we fail then let's fix that.

So you wouldn't want to go down the annual release route?
No I think that would be... Making a game per year is too quick, you need more than a year to build a great game.

You guys are obviously at the top of the military FPS ladder, if a developer was coming into the genre with a new IP what would you tell them?

That would be difficult, I don't want to give away any secrets [laughs]. No but in general you need to have a strong multiplayer to be able to fight. Multiplayer alone is a hard sell, if you want to sell a blockbuster game you need all the components in this genre to be up there and you need to do it really well. That's kind of the bottom line.

Is there space between you guys for more IPs?
I think there are more IPs than two. I think though that the quality bar might be fluctuating in some areas and that's the challenge; keep the quality high and even because if you have any bumps in the road people will stop playing the game, they won't like it.

So, whatever your game is, that game needs to be great. One, don't try and copy the competition because then you will only be second fiddle, you won't ever be number one. Second, whatever you do, do it well and that's what the game we're trying to build is based on - make sure that you focus on what's unique for you.

So you've no concerns about genre fatigue? A lot of FPS fans are saying they've seen it all before. Is the genre a bit saturated, a bit fatigued with the same old stuff?
In a way yes, but then again the genre is very specific. It's like racing games, "Oh I'm getting fed up with cars." Yeah maybe you shouldn't play racing games because that's what they are. If it's a first-person shooter and you're not first-person shooting then there are other games for you.

This is a very specific genre and there are people that want to play this experience. What we're doing is building the game that we want to play in this genre and if people don't like it then, really sorry, I think you should try something else. I'm not claiming that everyone should buy our game. If they don't like it, they don't like it.

We know that we can make the best Battlefield game, that being the things that we claim as Battlefield. There are other games that try to do different things. My only worry is that if everyone is trying to build the game that the competition is building then we will get fatigue. But then again you're actually giving someone the opportunity to fill the gap where no-one is.

We've seen that before; when Battlefield 1942 came out, no one had really built that type of game before. It's not that no-one could have done it, it's that no one did it because they were trying to build something else.

So fatigue can give openings for the competition to try and find new ways and I think that's great. We want harsh competition because it makes everyone better.

Finally, if you were asked, would you want to put Battlefield on things like the NGP and 3DS?
Well there is an iPhone version of Battlefield: Bad Company 2, which we didn't build. I think it's... First person shooters are hard. First of all the were invented on the PC. Well that's not really true but that's where they became big.

Then when first-person shooters came to consoles people hated it and said you can't play it and we have the same transition now. Who can build the first great iOS shooter? Today it's kind of not really there, it's not the same experience, but if you can create it for handhelds you just need one game that is great and everyone will try and take that knowledge and start building new ones.

Because the NGP looks geared for it doesn't with its power and dual thumb-sticks?
Yeah, yeah. We haven't looked into it yet because we have enough with the HD platforms right now and that's our focus and you never know, in the future, if you should explore more platforms.