Blu-Ray on PC is a big mess due to the DRM unfortunately, you usually need an expensive software package on top of the drive just to get the full functionality out of the drive. It's extremely frustrating and frankly not worth the time when you can get a $75 Blu-Ray player or better yet just own a PS3.

zirik wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 20:52:
how about the PC version? whats the installed base of DVD versus bluray capable rigs?

I am pretty sure there are still a lot more PCs out there that has DVD drives installed not BluRay. I have not yet seen any PC games shipped on a BluRay, and I honestly doubt I will ever see that happening. I think PC gaming industry will just skip over this whole BluRay craze and go straight digital distribution instead. I am sure that will cause some problems for some users but it will be fine for most.

As for the BF3 beta, what I've heard is the PC beta is ready to go, but they are waiting Microsoft and Sony approval on the console betas before they push it all out at ones.
I really don't see how the stupid console betas effecting the PC version, or why bother waiting for the console betas but that is the decision EA made I guess.

xXBatmanXx wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 10:17:
I really want to stick to my guns on this...going to be difficult not to get this game and or MW3. Going to try the BETA when it is released, and hope it doesn't make me as gitty as a school girl. I really want to vote with my wallet and stay out of these 2 games this year....

im on the same boat as you are. im holding off until reviews and friends indicate its worth buying at full price.

also of a side note. EA just revealed that the 360 version will have two DVDs. the PS3 wont have a problem since bluray can hold a lot. how about the PC version? whats the installed base of DVD versus bluray capable rigs?

This comment was edited on Sep 14, 2011, 20:57.

Zardoz5 wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 02:39:
Being able to see some game stuff from a browser may be cool, but I'm against the idea of them moving core functionality from the game to a browser. Guess what happens when Bad Company 6 or Medal of Honor 3 come out and tons of ppl are still playing BF3, they can just shutdown the Battlelog page for BF3, oops, your game is now gutted and useless. How long will it be until ads start cropping up in Battlelog, a few months after release? What happens when the Battlelog web page goes down, gets hit by a DDoS, etc, oops, game is down.

i think the move to an external browser is an evolution for pushing ad content to gamers. their first experiment was with billboards on BF2142. nobody bothered asking EA or DICE how successful that was in generating revenue. all i remember was the ads were totally out of place. imagine placing an ad for a movie in a game that is supposed to be centuries into the future. but i guess BF3 is closer to present day events. any word on in game ads for BF3?

O.o

space captain wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 15:32:
hey blue you dont scare me with your oh so scary threats

I'm not trying to scare you, I'm just making it clear that if you insist on continuing to bait people with personal insults you will be banned. If you are saying you don't care about that, which your posts seem to support, that's fine. I just feel like someone who's been posting here for over six years deserves a warning before that happens.

hey blue you dont scare me with your oh so scary threats

Hey Captain, are you pushing for a dishonorable discharge?

* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Sep 14, 2011, 11:09.

xXBatmanXx wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 10:17:
This. EA is known for shutting things down - this is how they will do it. Forec you to buy the new crap. I am sure MW is right behind them in how they are going to control this in MW3....

Actually in a hilarious twist of fate, MW3 is more open than BF3 is. You can host your own ranked servers on bare metal if you want thanks to them letting you download the dedicated server binaries. They're already going out of their way to accommodate community needs in terms of stuff like that, it's very surprising. I can't really believe I'm saying it but MW3 is more attractive in terms of tertiary features than BF3.

Guess what happens when Bad Company 6 or Medal of Honor 3 come out and tons of ppl are still playing BF3, they can just shutdown the Battlelog page for BF3, oops, your game is now gutted and useless. How long will it be until ads start cropping up in Battlelog, a few months after release? What happens when the Battlelog web page goes down, gets hit by a DDoS, etc, oops, game is down.

This. EA is known for shutting things down - this is how they will do it. Forec you to buy the new crap. I am sure MW is right behind them in how they are going to control this in MW3....

I really want to stick to my guns on this...going to be difficult not to get this game and or MW3. Going to try the BETA when it is released, and hope it doesn't make me as gitty as a school girl. I really want to vote with my wallet and stay out of these 2 games this year....

Verno wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 08:57:
I don't know, we'll see after beta I guess. I'm still very much on the fence about this. Love the game itself but EA seems to be doing their damndest to push people elsewhere.

Yup same here. I'd love to get the game but every single time BF3 is in the head lines I get nervous what EA reveals this time that will make me absolutely disgusted by their business practice.

This is a little off topic but did you guys notice how EA added to the beta access description on the Origin website, stating the early beta will be available to US customers only?

I really hope this will not be the case with the open beta, because that will suck donkey balls.

TheVocalMinority wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 07:49:
Everyone whining about a server-based browser will most probably be doing other fun things whilst you are playing BF3 rather than continually whining. But if thinking this makes you feel better about how much you are screwing yourself over by failing to be an assertive consumer then by all means go right ahead.

I don't mind the idea of a browser based server browser personally, it's not the end of the world or something. I agree with the concerns about giving EA that kind of access to my system however. Most of my RL friends have little to no awareness of the BF franchise so I doubt they will even know or care about Origin so I won't miss much by skipping this. Hell most of them don't even really know what Steam itself is despite running it.

I'm a bit weary of this type of quote. It's nice that they gave the PC version extra game functionality, I think we're all pretty happy about that. I'm not feeling very joyous towards the publishers contribution here, EA seems to be focused on leveraging this title instead of the end user experience which is troublesome. A lot of the features that support gameplay are significantly changed and I can't say it's design related as opposed to business which is where my problem with BF3 lies.

I don't know, we'll see after beta I guess. I'm still very much on the fence about this. Love the game itself but EA seems to be doing their damndest to push people elsewhere.

Lead platform yet:

-- No user run dedicated servers.
-- No proper ingame server browser.
-- Forced to login to another service to play.

PC might be the lead platform but with a console feature set.

This comment was edited on Sep 14, 2011, 09:10.

Bucky wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 01:06:
Do I like Origin right now? No. It is, however, where I can get BF3, therefor it is installed and BF3 is preordered. While everyone else is whining about a browser-based server browser, or Origin, I'll be playing and having fun.

Everyone whining about a server-based browser will most probably be doing other fun things whilst you are playing BF3 rather than continually whining. But if thinking this makes you feel better about how much you are screwing yourself over by failing to be an assertive consumer then by all means go right ahead.

Don't pet the troll, he'll just swear and stamp his feet.

After hearing DICE's BC2 marketing garbage about locked maps on your hard drive being "free maps" they gave you, having broken joystick controls and a locked FOV in single player that made me not want to play the it, I'll only believe what they say after playing the game for myself. Marketing speak and videos are nice and all, but I'll only believe all of their promises when I see them in game before my eyes.

That's the smart play here and the one that actually makes sense. There's a few confirmation bias headcases who are foaming to defend their purchase choice but Dice has a history of shaky launches and often poor product support. I think you're right about EA getting access to the browser and system too. Who wants EA having a browser plugin and a running background program on their system? Maybe if they kept their word about Origin not being required for games but BF3 requires it after all.

This comment was edited on Sep 14, 2011, 07:41.

jomisab wrote on Sep 13, 2011, 20:11:
It almost renews your faith, doesn't it?

Given the number of features they're taking out, the DRM, the lack of a server browser, public server files, LAN support, modding, mapping, etc, and the number of things they'll STILL take out as we get closer to release date (like they did with BC2), plus the fact that they'll nickle and dime players with map packs, if not P2W weapons.. (Edit: oh, and I forgot about Origin. No, thanks)

No, it doesn't renew my faith. Not in the least.

Red Orchestra 2, on the other hand..

Jerykk wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 01:58:

The UI shown in the screenshots and videos of Skyrim is very clearly designed for consoles. I'd like to see what, if any, changes are being made for the PC version.

I had this on preorder but will wait now until the game gets a review before I buy, I don't want to play anything unless its sorted for the pc.

I know someone who is doing the console side of BF3 and he just says its fucking awesome..

Zardoz5 wrote on Sep 14, 2011, 02:39:
but I'm against the idea of them moving core functionality from the game to a browser.

Considering every in-game browser Dice has ever done has sucked, has been slow and unresponsive, not to mention the slow loading times...why would it matter if they moved it to a browser, while succeeding both in providing a better server browser and faster load times?

How long will it be until ads start cropping up in Battlelog, a few months after release?

How about during Alpha test? If you are going to attempt to rip on something at least know what the fuck you are talking about. It's an EA game, In-game ads have been the norm for about 5 years now.

but I shouldn't have to have shitty Firefox or IE open to play a game.

Then use a different browser if you feel they are both shitty. My browser is open pretty much 100% of the time anyways, whether I'm playing or not even at my comp.
If you have a gaming PC, it can handle 150mb in memory and what little cpu usage it might use while idle. This isn't 1995 anymore.

Also how frequently are DICE going to keep up with Firefox, etc updates? What about surprise Microsoft updates that break its compatibility?

What? Someone needs a smack upside the head. Again, if you are gonna bitch about something, know what the fuck you are talking about.

To me DICE yanking out the server browser benefits them a hell of alot more than it benefits us, the user/paying customer. I'm surprised that so many people are just drinking the cool-aid and not thinking about the long term ramifications of this.

Really? What long term ramifications? Go on, tell us.