Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:

Regularly scheduled events

On PC Battlefield 3

The GameInformer.com offers a pair of new video interviews with DICE's Karl-Magnus Troedsson shot in DICE's Swedish offices. In one clip the DICE general manager discusses the creation of Battlefield 3, their upcoming military shooter sequel, and in the other he discusses their company's general philosophy. Topics include the reason for the long gap between Battlefield 2 and 3, their regrets over not bringing Battlefield: Bad Company to PCs ("if we could have, we would have done differently"), how they endeavor to have none of the versions for different systems "ports," though the PC is the "main" platform for Battlefield 3, introducing single-player play to what started as a multiplayer franchise, and more.

View
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >

31. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 16:51 Bard
 
general philosophy:

cash in on holiday rush
ship product in non-working state
don't assign sufficient back end resources to support the game online
deny any problems exist
fix parts, break others
release micro-transaction addons that give people who pay an advantage
release the same crap with +1 to the name

No - I hopped off that merry go round..
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
30. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 13:29 DangerDog
 
eRe4s3r wrote on Feb 14, 2011, 06:39:
I would actually try it but sadly its a WW2 game. And it has no destruction nor deformation mechanics whatsoever. No squad spawn, no jets, and oh yeah.. no drones, modern weapons, off-map artillery or revive.

Or short, its a realistic WW2 shooter with vehicles that are realistic (3 guys for 1 tank). This is the exact opposite of what Battlefield type games are about or what people who play them want.

That said, it does look very slick, but it *is* a WW2 game. And as such a definite no-buy from me.

RO2 will be a little more gamer friendly, there's even going to be a squad spawn type system and some micro-destruction. Still a long way off from release though, if they're not careful they'll be up going against Battlefield 3 and I would only wish that beating on someone like Activision's COD franchise.

 
Avatar 6174
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
29. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 13:11 Suddenly_Dead
 
Dev wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 23:29:
Oh and also, XP is still faster at DX9 gaming than vista or 7.

According to FiringSquad, DX9 performance is about even between XP and 7 (in some games, better on 7), which jives with what I've seen myself just testing Crysis between the two OSs.

You've also not touched on one of the biggest wins: 64-bit 7 has better support (and performance, according to that benchmark) than 64-bit XP. Of course, 64-bit gets you more accessible memory, and potentially better performance in 64-bit-compiled applications.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
28. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 12:27 bhcompy
 
Dev wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 23:29:
Oh and also, XP is still faster at DX9 gaming than vista or 7.

Do you really need that difference of 150fps to 170fps? DX9 games are ancient. A semi-modern 7 rig is going to max it out regardless of performance. I have no problem running Stalker, HL2, or any other DX9 game at highest settings.

As far as Win7. I liked XP, I thought I'd stick with it, but other than the shiatty explorer, Win7 is vastly superior in performance, capability, and just making things nice. Not having to have a floppy disk for a SATA primary hard drive is also huge.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
27. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 12:21 Jerykk
 
No squad spawn, no jets, and oh yeah.. no drones, modern weapons, off-map artillery or revive.

I'm pretty sure it does have off-map artillery.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
26. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 08:52 Verno
 
UAC is stupid.

Whatever, UAC is great and does its job perfectly in Windows 7. UAC in Vista was annoying. People want Microsoft to somehow make the operating system secure, compatible and easy to use without process elevation. Well sorry that's impossible, they took the next best route and it's working out well. If it bothers you that much then it's easily turned off.
 
Avatar 51617
 
Playing: The Last of Us Remastered
Watching: Kitchen Nightmares, Coherence, The Rover
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
25. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 08:33 eunichron
 
Dev wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 23:29:
eunichron wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 19:29:
7 is vastly superior to XP, and with SP1 on the horizon, now is the time to do it.
Depends. It sure is vastly superior in the good ole MS annoyance category that seems to get worse with every release. UAC is stupid. Not having a mute button for the microphone is even worse. I have to go into audio setup and disable the mic and then proceed to disable any other source of input as it "intelligently" auto picks the next source of input for me since it knows what it thinks I want.
When you "safely" eject a USB flash device, it doesn't actually turn off the device anymore like XP did. The light stays on. Which begs the question, is it actually making it safe to eject?
Or how about forcing services run in session 0 on vista and above? Since MS knows so much better than I do what I need, they made it very hard to access that, almost requiring the use of firedaemon.
Thats 4 of the things that come to mind immediately, there's plenty others.
Oh and also, XP is still faster at DX9 gaming than vista or 7.

And yes, I use 7 64 bit. One of the things that its much better at is SSD support. Oh and a pretty UI.

UAC can be turned off. I have no problems muting my headset on my gaming rig (Sennheiser USB headset, maybe it's different for separate analog/digital mics). I don't use flash drives much, but I haven't had any problems either ejecting removable storage (external drives, iPod, Droid X, etc.). I'm not a coder or a programmer, so whether or not my system services run in session 0 or whether or not I have access to it doesn't really matter to me.

I do understand your complaints, and they are valid, but they sure are nitpicky.
 
Avatar 13977
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
24. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 06:39 eRe4s3r
 
I would actually try it but sadly its a WW2 game. And it has no destruction nor deformation mechanics whatsoever. No squad spawn, no jets, and oh yeah.. no drones, modern weapons, off-map artillery or revive.

Or short, its a realistic WW2 shooter with vehicles that are realistic (3 guys for 1 tank). This is the exact opposite of what Battlefield type games are about or what people who play them want.

That said, it does look very slick, but it *is* a WW2 game. And as such a definite no-buy from me.
 
Avatar 54727
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
23. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 06:37 JayDeath
 
64 is great but when are we gonna see 128 players games? That's what I want and not pay monthly for it.  
Steam: Henry Krinkle

I want a new Brothers in Arms game!
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
22. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 05:11 ASeven
 
LittleMe wrote on Feb 14, 2011, 01:26:
It would be great if another company would compete with DICE on the PvP open battlefield type games. For now, this is all we have.


Tripwire. Red Orchestra: Heroes of Stalingrad.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
21. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 04:23 Dmitri_M
 
Prez wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 19:01:
I guess they're serious about the whole DirectX 10/11 exclusivity thing. I'm busy delaying my inevitable upgrade for as long as possible; BF3 coming as a Vista/Win 7 exclusive isn't helping.
I also expected to stick with XP for as long as possible. 7 has been working out great though. Just really solid. No complaints.

That said. I wouldn't have switched to it without also adopting an explorer replacement (xplorer2). I just can't stand Vista\7 style file explorer. But I never use it anymore so that's ok.
 
Avatar 22350
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
20. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 01:26 LittleMe
 
It would be great if another company would compete with DICE on the PvP open battlefield type games. For now, this is all we have.

 
Avatar 23321
 
Political freedom can only be preceded by economic freedom which is preceded by monetary freedom.
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
19. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 14, 2011, 01:17 Viktor King
 
I would pay good dollars to have the BC1 single-player campaign ported to a PC Battlefield.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
18. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 23:34 Sepharo
 
Dev wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 23:29:
Oh and a pretty UI.

Good UX too. Whenever I'm using my virtual XP at work I try dragging windows to the top to maximize and to the sides to split all the time. A few things have been butchered (advanced search for one) but most everything else is an improvement in flow and intuitiveness. My opinion of course.

 
Avatar 17249
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
17. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 23:29 Dev
 
eunichron wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 19:29:
7 is vastly superior to XP, and with SP1 on the horizon, now is the time to do it.
Depends. It sure is vastly superior in the good ole MS annoyance category that seems to get worse with every release. UAC is stupid. Not having a mute button for the microphone is even worse. I have to go into audio setup and disable the mic and then proceed to disable any other source of input as it "intelligently" auto picks the next source of input for me since it knows what it thinks I want.
When you "safely" eject a USB flash device, it doesn't actually turn off the device anymore like XP did. The light stays on. Which begs the question, is it actually making it safe to eject?
Or how about forcing services run in session 0 on vista and above? Since MS knows so much better than I do what I need, they made it very hard to access that, almost requiring the use of firedaemon.
Thats 4 of the things that come to mind immediately, there's plenty others.
Oh and also, XP is still faster at DX9 gaming than vista or 7.

And yes, I use 7 64 bit. One of the things that its much better at is SSD support. Oh and a pretty UI.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
16. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 19:29 eunichron
 
Prez wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 19:01:
I guess they're serious about the whole DirectX 10/11 exclusivity thing. I'm busy delaying my inevitable upgrade for as long as possible; BF3 coming as a Vista/Win 7 exclusive isn't helping.

7 is vastly superior to XP, and with SP1 on the horizon, now is the time to do it.

Actually, back at release when I got 7 Pro 64bit for $30 through a student discount was the time to do it.
 
Avatar 13977
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
15. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 19:20 Suddenly_Dead
 
entr0py wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 18:37:
Jerykk wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 18:20:
Tribes didn't have classes. It had a freeform loadout system that let you assume any role you wanted.

I think he's talking about the 3 classes of armor in Tribes. Armor choice did limit which weapons you could use, so it was essentially like having 3 very flexible classes.

Yeah, that's kind of what I'm getting at. The "classes" do impose certain role limitations through their mobility and weapon limits, but with customizable loadouts the actual flexibility you get from those 3 classes dwarfs what you get from BF2's 7. BC2 (and undoubtedly BF3 as well) doesn't give you as much pure flexibility as Tribes, but it's still more than enough to make up for the decreased number of classes.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
14. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 19:19 Jerykk
 
Considering you could only equip some weapons on certain classes, and your weapon selection had no impact on the movement of the armor, I'd hesitate to call it free-form. It's more like 3 classes where you can customize the weapon loadout on each one, with packs being the factor that determines if you're on O or D.

While it's true that your armor type did limit what kind of weapons you could use, this only applied to two weapons (and a few deployables). Heavy armor could equip every weapon and deployable except for the sniper rifle. Light armor could equip every weapon and deployable except for the mortar launcher, turret, inv station and ammo station. Medium armor couldn't use the sniper rifle or mortar launcher but could equip every deployable. That seems pretty flexible to me, compared to classes in other shooters where you can only use very specific types of weapons and gear.

In my experience, there were about 6 classes that formed naturally from the loadout system:

1. Capper (light armor flag grabber w/energy pack).
2. Light Defense (light armor flag or base defender w/energy pack).
3. Heavy Offense (heavy armor flag or base attacker w/energy pack).
4. Heavy Defense (heavy armor base defense w/shield pack or repair pack).
5. Heavy On Flag (heavy armor flag defense w/shield pack or repair pack).
6. Turret monkey (medium armor turret deployer and base maintainer w/repair pack).

There was a lot of flexibility based on player skill. For example, heavy offense might use a shield pack or inventory station deployable instead of an energy pack so that they could stay in the enemy base for longer. Heavy offense could even become a capper on occasion. Aside from the sniper rifle, mortar launcher and turret/inv/ammo station deployables, there weren't any other limitations as to what roles a specific armor type could assume. Compare this to TF2, for example, where only medics can heal other players and only engineers can deploy turrets.
 
Avatar 20715
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
13. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 19:01 Prez
 
I guess they're serious about the whole DirectX 10/11 exclusivity thing. I'm busy delaying my inevitable upgrade for as long as possible; BF3 coming as a Vista/Win 7 exclusive isn't helping.  
Avatar 17185
 
“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”
- Mahatma Gandhi
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
12. Re: On PC Battlefield 3 Feb 13, 2011, 18:57 ViRGE
 
Jerykk wrote on Feb 13, 2011, 18:20:
Tribes didn't have classes. It had a freeform loadout system that let you assume any role you wanted.
Considering you could only equip some weapons on certain classes, and your weapon selection had no impact on the movement of the armor, I'd hesitate to call it free-form. It's more like 3 classes where you can customize the weapon loadout on each one, with packs being the factor that determines if you're on O or D.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
31 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >


footer

Blue's News logo