Battlefield 3!

[Icy]

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That just blew everything that can appear at E3 this year, completely away. COMPLETELY!!!!

It was absolutely amazing. The feeling I got when they showed that image was just…insane.

I must come off as lame for acting like this about a video game, but that was just insane.

[Milkyway64]

Modern warfare 3? But hasn't cod been nearly the same every installment for better or worse?

["User"]

That's Battlefield 3, not MW3.

[ThePointingMan]

I think it's more like battlefield 3, because that's awesome, and the picture has tanks, which you don't drive in ModernWarfare, also the general look of the character/tanks is more battlefieldey lookin.

[Milkyway64]

In that case, I retract my statement. Battlefield 2 was > cod as far as I could see.

[Icy]

Haha, I should've said BF3 somewhere.

But Modern Warfare 3 looked pretty good. They're two different types of games so they're hard to compare. But talking about graphics, sound, and realism? Battlefield 3 wins.

I will be getting both games when they come out.

But I will be playing Battlefield 3 10 times more. :P

[DZComposer]

Updated the thread title. Please make an effort be descriptive when titling threads.

[Wes]

I love playing BF2 only because it's fun killing your team mates. And I hate CoD.

[Vy'drach]

Modern warfare 3? But hasn't cod been nearly the same every installment for better or worse?

Pretty much, this was a post I saw on Ponychan some time ago in response to someone raving about MW3.

But yeah, that's Battlefield 3. Unfortunately, the people that worked on MW2 were hired by EA, and are working on Battlefield 3, but as long as the veteran Battlefield developers are still working on it, the game still has dedicated servers, the weapons behave... believably (Which given that you can change firing modes and certain weapons are not pin-point accurate), it should be fine, also the lack of perks and killstreaks.

[Milkyway64]

Killstreaks are the dumbest feature ever. The player kicking everyone's ass is the LAST person who needs help.

[Vy'drach]

Agreed, and I didn't use the kill generating ones, either. I'd usually use the ones that benefit the team, but Battlefield gives players similar things in the form of the commander and carried equipment, like the Recon's motion tracker.

[LoneWolf]

Yeah, I loved BF2, and after that the series went downhill with the spinoffs IMO. Good to see EA doing something right, but I bet my ass there'll still be some sort of online pass BS for us to deal with.

EA sucks.

[Sabre]

BF3 look great in trailers, but wheres the gameplay? MW3 didnt have the graphics, but at least they showed him doing something. Even the multiplayer trailer seemed a bit crap. I know battle field moments happen, but what they showed in that trailer seemed very staged to me.

[Icy]

BF3 look great in trailers, but wheres the gameplay? MW3 didnt have the graphics, but at least they showed him doing something. Even the multiplayer trailer seemed a bit crap. I know battle field moments happen, but what they showed in that trailer seemed very staged to me.

During E3 they showed 10 minutes of gameplay, live. And of course there's the 12 minute Fault Line gameplay…

[Sabre]

During E3 they showed 10 minutes of gameplay, live. And of course there's the 12 minute Fault Line gameplay…

My point exactly. A turret, and a faultline is basicly walking from a to b and a breif quick time event.

[Lord Asriel]

My point exactly. A turret, and a faultline is basicly walking from a to b and a breif quick time event.

Actually there was like 6 minutes of urban battle in Fault Line trailer, and in the multi trailer, when the tank battle started it didn't stop. So, I think we saw the gameplay enough.

[Gene Inari]

My point exactly. A turret, and a faultline is basicly walking from a to b and a breif quick time event.

Staged my ass:

I can't wait for the jets.

[Sabre]

Staged my ass:

I can't wait for the jets.

Exactly. Staged, as that video proved. Where is all the dramatic explosions and tank battles and hand to hand combat and the detroyable buildings? Not to say the game will be bad, but compair it to the multiplayer trailer. Very different games.

[Gene Inari]

Exactly. Staged, as that video proved. Where is all the dramatic explosions and tank battles and hand to hand combat and the detroyable buildings? Not to say the game will be bad, but compair it to the multiplayer trailer. Very different games.

There are a couple good explosions in the demo, don't blame me if you can't see a frag go off or when someone on either side is using an RPG on a close-quarters, demo, infantry-based map. The video I found and linked isn't the best example. There is an APC on the demo map, but was never seen in the video for whatever reason. If there was footage of that I could find, you would no doubt see the building-blasting potential it has.

Also, the only trailers there have been are campaign trailers, not multiplayer. The two are completely seperate and the campaigns in the few BF games that have had them tend to have a bit more thematic flare to them, they're call "set-piece battles/scenes." So far all we've seen is two campaign settings; Fault Line and Thunder Run. Also, the game is also still in a relatively early alpha stage for the multiplayer side. We should be grateful for the demo DICE gave the people at E3.

[Sabre]

There are a couple good explosions in the demo, don't blame me if you can't see a frag go off or when someone on either side is using an RPG on a close-quarters, demo, infantry-based map. The video I found and linked isn't the best example. There is an APC on the demo map, but was never seen in the video for whatever reason. If there was footage of that I could find, you would no doubt see the building-blasting potential it has.

Also, the only trailers there have been are campaign trailers, not multiplayer. The two are completely seperate and the campaigns in the few BF games that have had them tend to have a bit more thematic flare to them, they're call "set-piece battles/scenes." So far all we've seen is two campaign settings; Fault Line and Thunder Run. Also, the game is also still in a relatively early alpha stage for the multiplayer side. We should be grateful for the demo DICE gave the people at E3.

Wrong. The multiplayer trailer is on all the major sites and has been for days.

http://www.giantbomb.com/e3-2011-battlefield-3-multiplayer-trailer/17-4229/

Compair that to the video you posted where people run from a to b, stand at a distence and take pot shots at each other. Note that it is exactly the same map, but the trailers make it seem much more dramatic and is obviously staged.

More over, the fact you know the trailer before and after by name tells me you are being deliberatly deceptive.

[Fox-Shot]

Wrong. The multiplayer trailer is on all the major sites and has been for days.

http://www.giantbomb.com/e3-2011-battlefield-3-multiplayer-trailer/17-4229/

Compair that to the video you posted where people run from a to b, stand at a distence and take pot shots at each other. Note that it is exactly the same map, but the trailers make it seem much more dramatic and is obviously staged.

More over, the fact you know the trailer before and after by name tells me you are being deliberatly deceptive.

I'm not sure if I should get it as of right now. Because I'm planning on building a gaming PC and I have an Xbox 360 right now, I'm planning on getting the PC built a couple months after Battlefield 3 releases (Very very very very optimistic, primarily since this is a hope of a Christmas gift funded project). The PC versions of Battlefield are always better, and I don't like the idea of buying 2 of the same games simply because I changed focus.

[Gene Inari]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLCFQyqEoHA

Check this out!

[Sabre]

That's the same mission as the faultline trailer.

[Icy]

What's the problem, Sabre? The multiplayer footage isn't "staged". They're just not showing us the cool parts yet. I trust DICE.

As for the campaign, it looks like all FPS campaigns. With a lot more focus on something most games don't have. Realism. ^^ I mean, just listening to the sounds, ambiance, and constant shouting at each other. It's so amazing. They really did something there.

I imagine multiplayer will be as good as single player in that respect.

And multiplayer will be just that. Battlefield multiplayer. No reason to suspect otherwise. A lack of good gameplay? Trailers? Who cares. It's Battlefield 3, the true successor to BF2 and that's all I care about.

But just to say it, I've been sold on this since it was first announced. Also, that Fault Line PS3 gameplay is nice. The graphics look almost as good as the PC footage!

But I'll still be getting it for PC. ;)

[Sabre]

What's the problem, Sabre? The multiplayer footage isn't "staged". They're just not showing us the cool parts yet. I trust DICE.

As for the campaign, it looks like all FPS campaigns. With a lot more focus on something most games don't have. Realism. ^^ I mean, just listening to the sounds, ambiance, and constant shouting at each other. It's so amazing. They really did something there.

I imagine multiplayer will be as good as single player in that respect.

And multiplayer will be just that. Battlefield multiplayer. No reason to suspect otherwise. A lack of good gameplay? Trailers? Who cares. It's Battlefield 3, the true successor to BF2 and that's all I care about.

But just to say it, I've been sold on this since it was first announced. Also, that Fault Line PS3 gameplay is nice. The graphics look almost as good as the PC footage!

But I'll still be getting it for PC.

Someone said problem without using a trollface or a meme?

Also, I'll get this point out of the way. This game, from the previews and based on other BF games, is far from realistic. If you want realism, play Arma or Flashpoint. These games are about as realistic as Indina Jones, and that's not a bad thing.

Onto the main point though. I have no problem. The game has great graphics, and the campaign looks cool. You have to remember though that these are trailers, and are often misleading. What I'm seeing here is people going on about how awesome the game be based soley on trailers. For what it's worth, the animations are really nice. There's one trailer where you see them running in slow motion, looks great.

What is shown in the multiplayer trailers is nothing like what the actual gameplay is like. I played 2142 and a bit of BF2. Not only are the games not that dramatic, but if you tried any of the cool stuff seen in the trailers you'd be taken down instantly. As said, no problem with that, but I'd rather see stuff you can actually do.

As for the singleplayer, my concern it will be flat. Walking from A to B triggering quick time events and scripted scenes is boring, and the only shooting we see is of no skill, no threat peons or otherwise doing exactly what the CO tells him and nothing else. Oh, and a boring tank battle level. I like games to be interactive, and I will be playing BF3 for the single player. As such, I want the gameplay to be fun. Compare the trailer for Resistence 3. Yeah, Resistence 3 look dull by campairson, but at least you can see that the game is being played, rather then just watching.