Battlefield 3

[oldage]

I was actually referring to posting the full ones myself didn't think those cutoff ones from Gronf were bad.

 

anyway, if anyone wants the gameinformer scans just PM me.

[FullMetal]

You can check 'em out yourself at some internet planet that's has been around for some time about the battlefield franchise . That's all I'm saying.

 

Looking good... looking really good.

[Menaced]

So far so good, DICE. Everything I've heard so far has had me impressed, very impressed, actually.

 

Looking forward to this.

[Knife]

Looks like it could stand to be one of the best looking games around visually, a big step forward on BC2 and that's a good looking game. I think my PC's gonna need some hardware love.

[Fnorg]

Can't believe I got punished for a tiny little snippet which just as well could've been made by myself (which it wasn't) but the link still stands? Come on. What's the policy here?

 

4870 512MB - will it make it? Pretty sure my CPU's gonna need an upgrade, but a 4870 shouldn't be too shabby, right?

[FullMetal]

You might run it low probably... guess same thing for me. But don't expect any smooth frames and high resolution setups.

 

I really need a new rig .

[Tommy-Vercetti19]

Definitely going to need a CPU, my Q8400 will simply implode! Going to have to save for an I7 or AMD equivalent.

[The-King]

 

Can't believe I got punished for a tiny little snippet which just as well could've been made by myself (which it wasn't) but the link still stands? Come on. What's the policy here?

Since my rule topic has inexplicably disappeared: the rule on scans is that you can't post them directly, but linking to an article containing them is on the other hand a-ok

[Menaced]

 

Since my rule topic has inexplicably disappeared: the rule on scans is that you can't post them directly, but linking to an article containing them is on the other hand a-ok

If this is the case, then here are some interesting scans for those who haven't seen them yet;

 

http://www.gamersverse.com/articles/655/ga...ncluding-scans/

[papanesta]

Can't believe I got punished for a tiny little snippet which just as well could've been made by myself (which it wasn't) but the link still stands? Come on. What's the policy here?

Since my rule topic has inexplicably disappeared: the rule on scans is that you can't post them directly, but linking to an article containing them is on the other hand a-ok

Most pinned topics without recent posts were unpinned. It should still be somewhere!

[oldage]

some screenshots:

 

http://planetbattlefield.gamespy.com/fullstory.php?id=164379

 

 

GAMEPLAY

 

http://www.ea.com/battlefield3/videos/gameplay-debut

 

 

Edited February 23, 2011 by oldage

[Xboxless]

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!! thanks oldage.

 

I have a feeling they are going to go all coddy on the story line.....

[Fnorg]

I only have a bunch of negative things I want to say - that wasn't gameplay, I don't care about the stupid story you tacked on etc etc - but I won't get in on that. At least the GFX and animations look pretty damn snazzy!

[papanesta]

I only have a bunch of negative things I want to say - that wasn't gameplay, I don't care about the stupid story you tacked on etc etc - but I won't get in on that. At least the GFX and animations look pretty damn snazzy!

How wasn't it gameplay?

 

As for the addition of a storyline, after playing Modern Combat when it first came out, all I can say is a campaign needs direction. BC and BC2's storylines were infinitely more playable. The second more so than the first, but I suppose that was to be expected. Just seems like you're being negative for the sake of being negative. In the end, yeah, we're all most interested in the multiplayer, but I will play the story, so I'm glad they're at least spending time on a plot.

 

But yeah, it's looking amazing. They're still obviously teasing a lot, but it's working. I'm excited.

[Vin.]

"Preorder and get 'Back to Kharkand' expansion pack for no extra charge"

 

Really? What is with game companies these days?

 

@Gronf: Did you actually watch the video? Be it snippits of in game and cut scenes, it is still Gameplay. Sorry it wasn't long enough and didn't suffice your needs.

 

Seems like they're keeping to the teasers rather than giving it all away.

[papanesta]

 

"Preorder and get 'Back to Kharkand' expansion pack for no extra charge"

 

Really? What is with game companies these days?

I prefer that to every retail company offering something different.

[CryptReaperDorian]

There wasn't much in the gameplay trailer, but it's atleast something. I just hope the characters are as likeable as the Bad Company guys. "I'm going to save me some cheerleaders!"

 

If you want something to hold you off for Battlefield 3, then I think Battlefield Play4Free will do pretty well.

 

Here's the trailer if nobody has seen it yet (which this trailer has been around for a little while).

 

 

[ilya]

Well, if graphics were all I cared about, I'd certainly have this pre-ordered. Hopefully it does deliver on the other fronts, because I've been itchin' for a proper game like this for years now.

Edited February 24, 2011 by Supreme.

[FullMetal]

First Person Body? Dragging fallen comrades? "Realistic weapon models"?

 

It looks good but if they dare to deliver a "OSCAR MIKE TEN FOOT MOBILES LOADED FOR BEAR STAY FROSTY DO EVERYTHING RAMIREZ" story then they can just quit making Singleplayer portions for their games and only do Multiplayer.

 

Looks promising... big time. I just hope it's all worth it and will hit like a bombshell in the current FPS market (which is pretty stale lately... for years).

[Fnorg]

I only have a bunch of negative things I want to say - that wasn't gameplay, I don't care about the stupid story you tacked on etc etc - but I won't get in on that. At least the GFX and animations look pretty damn snazzy! 

How wasn't it gameplay?

That came out wrong, sorry. It wasn't a 'proper' gameplay video. It was a bunch of one-second clips from the single player mashed together. Vin's got it down; I'm a picky bastard.

[ilya]

 

First Person Body?

Man, there's so much they could do with that.

 

For example, they could completely do away with health bars/regen and make it where you simply view your condition based on how tattered/bloodied your clothes are. I'm sure they could work out a system where certain points would gradually wear/tear and also have it so wounds appear exactly where they struck. Things would mend (i.e. fade) back to normal when you heal (could simply do with preventing you from looking down then). Add that to injured legs making you hobble and such, though leave the f*cked vision out of it or make it contextual.

 

Another thing, being able to actually see the character manipulate gadgets/gear from pouches or pockets. Optionally, of course, as the camera shouldn't be forced other than maybe during tutorials. For checking ammo, you just glance down at the relevant pouch.

 

 

 

Am I just insane, or would this stuff make first person much more awesome?

Edited February 24, 2011 by Supreme.

[FullMetal]

Yes, I've been hammering on that for ages. I remember explaining this on a Infinity Ward fanforum ages ago after the release of Call of Duty 2 for their future releases. How awesome it would be, how much possibilities it had.

 

It was similar to what you just explained. Checking opened pouches (and closed ones) for the ammount of 'mags' you have left. Checking how much grenades you have on you. This brings more tactic to the game and less run and gun. Now, in pretty much every FPS, you just barge into a room and spray at everyone that looks like a hostile target and/or moves. How do you need to check on your ammo? Simple, check your hud or 'remember' how much you had in some 'hardcore' mode.

 

With the 'First Person Body system' used properly you'd have to look down on your chestrig/vest and check what pouches are opened and which ones are closed. Do the maths and you'll know how much rounds you'll have left.

 

Endless possibilities... innnovative I tell you. But I shouldn't get my hopes up for this. They'll probably introduce this in 25 years with Call of Honor: Battlefield Warfare 3 and call it 'insanely revolutionary' when modifications will have done it for years.

[ilya]

 

But I shouldn't get my hopes up for this.

Yeah...

 

Perhaps some day

[JOSEPH X]

I only get one of these military fps shooters every couple of years, and last time it was MW2. I passed up on B2, but nearly all my friends from gtaf on xbl were on it a lot, so I'll probs get this one to satisfy my urge to run around all shooty-like with friends.

 

As for what you were talking about, hudless gaming is already here. Dead Space 2 has absolutely no onscreen data or even a pause menu worth the name - everything is dealt with in the gameworld.

[Knife]

With the 'First Person Body system' used properly you'd have to look down on your chestrig/vest and check what pouches are opened and which ones are closed. Do the maths and you'll know how much rounds you'll have left.

You like the realism aspect of games so it's obvious our opinions will differ but that just seems extremely annoying. I don't want to spend half my time looking at the floor just to check my ammo count. Why do that when it can just be put on a HUD? Realism like that takes away from the fun IMO. I look for just plain old simple fun in games, not to reenact or simulate real life. That's a different genre all together.

 

For me the whole point of games is they're not locked down to the confines of real life inconvenience.

[Fnorg]

I'm a stickler for realism, but that I think that sort of tedium should be kept out of BF. Leave that sort of thing to Red Orchestra and other realistic games. Just bring back the mag count and I'll be a happy camper. I like BF as the middle ground between the balls to the walls ridiculous Call of Duty series and super serious stuff like ArmA. I wouldn't mind first person body, though. There's absolutely no reason not to have it.

[FullMetal]

True Knife but in my opinion a First Person Body system as me and Supreme. elaborated upon isn't really a choice and feature in sake of "realism". It just provides a totally new way of gameplay and gameflow.

 

It slows the game a tad down and forces the player to be a bit more alert. It's not like you have to stare down at your 'body' constantly, one quick view downwards and you have a quick glimpse of what equipment you have 'left'.

 

You got shot? Check how bad it is. Big bloodstain? This means you're either f*cked or should get "help" a.s.a.p. We gamers are just brainstorming on this and it's more than possible to implement things like this into a game even when you want to keep the "lore" of the original franchise in it.

 

Also on screen HUD (ammo counter) can be toggled on or off if you wish... and the first person body system (as a "tool") could also be optional. And I'm just talking about singleplayer here. Imagine the "FPBS" in multiplayer, hardcore modes?

 

[d0mm2k8]

 

Yes, I've been hammering on that for ages. I remember explaining this on a Infinity Ward fanforum ages ago after the release of Call of Duty 2 for their future releases. How awesome it would be, how much possibilities it had.

In hindsight, that seems like pretty hopeless thinking.

 

On the realism aspect, I barely look at my HUD for some reason.

I only really pay attention to the game world and when I run out of ammo I'm just like 'Ahhh sh*t'. So I reckon a FPSB system is something I'd use a fair amount.

[ilya]

Knew a response like Knife's was imminent It's very subjective and relative, not absolute at all.

 

Yeah, definitely have things optional or customisable, and obviously much of it kept to only certain types of games.

 

The main thing is just having the body awareness, which any first-person game could benefit from in my opinion.

[FullMetal]

 

The main thing is just having the body awareness, which any first-person game could benefit from in my opinion.

This is something we can all agree on. "We" have been a bunch of flying arms and weapons for too long now in FPS games. (and yes I know there are "some" games out there who implemented it... shabby and not so shabby).