[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28464734]I don't think there should be pilot kits, but I do hope they up the speed of aerial vehicles so it's not so easy to nail ground targets. BF2 was unbalanced in that manner, attack helicopters and jets just have undisputed dominance of all targets. I hope they increase the map boundary limits so jets and helicopters can get some more "slingshot room" but it should be harder for jets and helis to strafe and bomb their targets. It's really annoying when a helicopter flys down, guns down your entire squad and you can do jack shit about it.[/QUOTE]
I don't mind if someone is good with the helicopters/jets, but I'd like a practical type of anti-air weapon, the AA missile stations in BF2 just didn't cut it.
Here's what I do if I start to feel doubtful about BF3 (hasn't happened ever since the gameplay videos came out though).
-I loved BF2 => payed $50
-I liked BC2 => payed $60
-BF3 [i]will[/i] be better than BC2
-Therefore, I should buy BF3
I also can't wait for Brink.
I'm going to be spent this year :saddowns:
Personally I'm buying BF3, unless it comes out being an exceptionally mainstream pile of trash. Not really worried about that, though.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;28465042]Personally I'm buying BF3, unless it comes out being an exceptionally mainstream pile of trash. Not really worried about that, though.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=evilweazel;28465042]mainstream[/QUOTE]
Yeah, we all liked BF3 before it become popular.
... oh wait.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;28464782]I don't mind if someone is good with the helicopters/jets, but I'd like a practical type of anti-air weapon, the AA missile stations in BF2 just didn't cut it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, or make helicopters more susceptible to ground fire from infantry. Attack helicopters should probably avoid flying 20-30 meters away from clusters of infantry. Really there just needs to be more stuff to keep them on their toes. Helicopter pilots had way too much confidence. I mean, of course infantry should still take cover when the helicopter barrels down on them but a hail of machine gun and assault rifle fire against a helicopter probably should do [I]something.[/I]
Firing a pkm/m95 at a helicopter never felt as good as it should. I really hope they do beef up the weapon handling a bit, at heart most of the weapons felt the same even though they were chambered with different rounds. The G3A3 unlock was a major disappointment for me, no grenade launcher and yet the thing just didn't feel as badass as it should have :saddowns:
Alot of people here are requesting things that are already in Project Reality. If you guys haven't tried it yet then you really need to. It's an incredibly well made mod and well worth the download.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28465100]Yeah, or make helicopters more susceptible to ground fire from infantry. Attack helicopters should probably avoid flying 20-30 meters away from clusters of infantry. Really there just needs to be more stuff to keep them on their toes. Helicopter pilots had way too much confidence. I mean, of course infantry should still take cover when the helicopter barrels down on them but a hail of machine gun and assault rifle fire against a helicopter probably should do [I]something.[/I]
Firing a pkm/m95 at a helicopter never felt as good as it should. I really hope they do beef up the weapon handling a bit, at heart most of the weapons felt the same even though they were chambered with different rounds. The G3A3 unlock was a major disappointment for me, no grenade launcher and yet the thing just didn't feel as badass as it should have :saddowns:[/QUOTE]
Yeah, the thing I liked about BC1 was that ground fire was a concern for most pilots kind of like in BF2, but in BC2 you could just circle strafe the day away and in BF2 it wasn't enough of a threat to worry about.
[editline]6th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Gogo;28465087]Yeah, we all liked BF3 before it become popular.
... oh wait.[/QUOTE]
Well I guess I used the wrong word, I guess generic would be a better one.
I have a feeling that when you hear a jet fly over, that he doesn't know which building your in because they're going to be taking buildings to ground level instantly
JDAM's in BC2 would look amazing, imagine a 8 story building collapsing from one
I'm really looking for a mix no game has ever seen before:
Destruction and jets.
[QUOTE=Spetzaz;28465653]I'm really looking for a mix no game has ever seen before:
Destruction and jets.[/QUOTE]
Oh you know, they never know what the playerbase might think of doing with that combination :v:
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28465100]Yeah, or make helicopters more susceptible to ground fire from infantry. Attack helicopters should probably avoid flying 20-30 meters away from clusters of infantry. Really there just needs to be more stuff to keep them on their toes. Helicopter pilots had way too much confidence. I mean, of course infantry should still take cover when the helicopter barrels down on them but a hail of machine gun and assault rifle fire against a helicopter probably should do [I]something.[/I]
Firing a pkm/m95 at a helicopter never felt as good as it should. I really hope they do beef up the weapon handling a bit, at heart most of the weapons felt the same even though they were chambered with different rounds. The G3A3 unlock was a major disappointment for me, no grenade launcher and yet the thing just didn't feel as badass as it should have :saddowns:[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't mind somewhat dynamic weakspots on the chopper, so that even if it's not destroyed, it may need to retreat.
Like say, the Cockpit, Missile Pods, Chaingun, and Rotors.
The Cockpit is weak because if you shoot it up, then the pilot can't see through the shattered glass very well (also, the pilot himself maybe be hit). The Chain Gun and Missile Pods could be damaged by small arms fire and become inoperable, requiring repairs (and missile pods could explode if you wanna take the action route), and Rotors can become damaged, causing the chopper to lose altitude until it crashes, or begin spinning uncontrollably if the rear rotor is disabled. And last but not least, like in BC2, AT Weapons and Tank Cannons should be an instant killer.
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28465697]Oh you know, they never know what the playerbase might think of doing with that combination :v:[/QUOTE]
Just Cause 2 oil rigs
[editline]7th March 2011[/editline]
And cranes. :v:
I like my idea because you don't have to nerf the handling by making it harder to use (and thus even less people are able to use them well), but you're not invulnerable, and still need to be careful and watch yourself.
I'd like to see helicopter crashes... Yeah you can destroy a helicopter but as it stands in all battlefield games that have them, You shoot them until they explode. In Badcompany 2 they spin as if the tail rotor was lost just before exploding... I'd like to see loss of power and the helicopter crash instead of just exploding
[QUOTE=evilweazel;28464125]My friend just legitimately offered to sell me his GTX 460 for $75 dollars, should I buy it and put it towards my new PC I'm building for Skyrim/BF3? It's better than what I have now, so why not.[/QUOTE]
If it's a 1gb, Hell yes, if it's a 768mb, sure.
[QUOTE=Brt5470;28465899]If it's a 1gb, Hell yes, if it's a 768mb, sure.[/QUOTE]
Well I ran over to his house and got it, but I payed $100 for it, I've known the guy for a while and I don't have the hear take it from him from him without giving him a fair amount for it, don't really mind though, I know he needs it. It was a 1 gig, btw.
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28463883]The thing with Battlefield 2 that annoyed/annoys a lot of people is that you had to install the patches on top of each other.
You can't just patch a 1.5 on top of BF2 patch 1.12 and expect it would run.
That shit made me reinstall the game like 2 times back in the day (and you know how fast the patching on BF2 goes...)[/QUOTE]
I was always able to jump to 1.4 then 1.5
I would like to see HMG's be able to fuckup a choppers with rapid fire into the cockpit or other vulnerable areas, proper penetration would be good, having to hit side of cockpit at anywhere around a 90degree angle otherwise get richochet.
This annoyed me in BF2 that was only really a weapon that just stole chopper take down kills.
If an enemy chopper is dumb enough to hover right above a flag he deserves to get fucked up by a heavy machine gun.
ArmA 2 is good example with choppers having to be used from a safe distance like in all real life scenarios.
Still having great use for CAS roles but not feeling overpowered at all.
Balance is crucial for this game to remain fun, BF2 there was way too much raping going on.
I sure hope they don't make air support overpowered again in BF3.
Just because bf2 pilots complain everytime that AA is too powerful so is made useless again.
AA is meant to put fear into pilots it's not just there to be a nuisance.
Funny how in bf2 you could hop in static AA for a second and could always rely on it being destroyed within 5 to 10 seconds. And just use your SRAW to take them out cause they always fly in a predictable path.
Like said before, I'd like for choppers to spin wildly and crash when destroyed. It'd be pretty cool if the pilot of an apache could die/live through a helicopter crash depending on where it lands (IE city map, chopper crashing in the street rather than a building).
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28465732]I wouldn't mind somewhat dynamic weakspots on the chopper, so that even if it's not destroyed, it may need to retreat.
Like say, the Cockpit, Missile Pods, Chaingun, and Rotors.
The Cockpit is weak because if you shoot it up, then the pilot can't see through the shattered glass very well (also, the pilot himself maybe be hit). The Chain Gun and Missile Pods could be damaged by small arms fire and become inoperable, requiring repairs (and missile pods could explode if you wanna take the action route), and Rotors can become damaged, causing the chopper to lose altitude until it crashes, or begin spinning uncontrollably if the rear rotor is disabled. And last but not least, like in BC2, AT Weapons and Tank Cannons should be an instant killer.[/QUOTE]
Hate comparing arma and battlefield, but in ArmA PVP years ago I manged to make a well placed shot with a Barret against the tail rotor of a helicopter. I watched him spin around in the air for a good 20 seconds trying to regain control before he bailed and the helicopter crashed :v:
[editline]7th March 2011[/editline]
OH, this game also needs fallback spawns this time. Not sure that I've seen it in any other games, but RnL Mod for HL2 had a separate set of spawns for each capture point, so when enemies venture into the point, you spawn a short ways away to avoid spawnrape.
If you try to make Battlefield 3 feel all realistic and 100% accurate than it's not going to feel like a battlefield game at all. Sure some of it may be unrealistic and unorthodox, but that was the fun of battlefield games. If you try to make a game too serious and too deadly, it just becomes a boring pile of garbage. You can't do anything without getting killed. That's why the communities for games like ARMA and Project Reality don't expand much. They're too serious, too drawn out, and overall too boring in my opinion. I didn't struggle to get across the map just to die in 4 seconds. Usually, the only way you can enjoy super serious games is if you have a few people to play with that you know, otherwise it's usually just terrible. [b]If you make a game too serious, it will just become boring.[/b]
With the amount of hype that BF3 is going to generate, the starting player base is going to be full of people that have no idea what the hell teamwork is. People say that most of the people that play BC2 are idiots that don't know what teamwork is. Battlefield 2 was just like that for a while after it was released. The reason teamwork in BF2 doesn't seem as bad now is because it's older. Most of the people that play it now know what they're doing since they've been playing it for so long. In another year BC2 will probably be like that, especially with BF3 coming out (although BC2 will probably just die out if BF3 does turn out as good as they say). [b]The player base of a game is almost always terrible for the first year that it's out if teamwork is involved and necessary.[/b]
Complaints about air vehicles being over-powered is hard to address. I think BC2 did this perfectly with tracer darts combined with the RPG/Gustav, or using the AT4. However this will be even more difficult with the addition of jets. Jets will be hard to hit with the tracer dart (assuming they keep it). Same can be said for the AT4. However, if you give infantry some kind of lock-on anti-air rocket, that will completely screw over all air vehicles. Flying air vehicles will basically be suicide. You could try to counter this by giving air vehicles shit-tons of flares, which may work. The problem with that is if you don't have enough people with rockets to be able to shoot the air vehicles, then they will go back to never dying. Jets make it extremely hard to balance air vehicles. I'm not saying they should take them out (personally I love them and look forward to crashing one into a building for shits and giggles), but people need to understand that [b]it's hard to make air vehicles not be overpowered without being useless.[/b]
If "feels like battlefield" is getting killed by helicopters and fighter jets for 20 minutes until the round ends, then I don't think I'd like that aspect of battlefield to be in. Testament to this fact is that at any given time 5 people are waiting around for jets and helicopters to spawn and then they all race to them like idiots. Youc an't walk around a map as infantry without a helicopter or a jet spotting you and promptly destroying you.
Theres number of problems with air vehicles, all very easy to resolve with trial and error in testing:
- Jets and attack helicopters re-spawn too quickly
- Jets and attack helicopters are too easy to repair and too quick to resupply.
- Too many jets and air vehicles per map and the maps are too small for the large number of them.
I just hope they don't nerf helicopters and jets too much; sure they were powerful in BF2, but they could still be taken out. BC2 attack helicopters feel like flying a brick, so unresponsive and are hardly worth using between the tiny maps, tracer darts, at4s, and those stationary AA guns; and that's if the tanks, apcs, trucks, etc... leave you alone, which they don't. Perhaps the main issue was the maps.
Is there anything new in terms of gameplay?
Battlefield 3 looks really visually impressive thanks to the new Frostbite engine, but if I'm going to pay $60.00 (I'm assuming its a full price game) for this, shouldn't there be something new to it?
[QUOTE=Kopimi;28469289]Is there anything new in terms of gameplay?
Battlefield 3 looks really visually impressive thanks to the new Frostbite engine, but if I'm going to pay $60.00 (I'm assuming its a full price game) for this, shouldn't there be something new to it?[/QUOTE]
Why does every game have to be an entirely new concept? Don't fix what isn't broken, not a hard concept.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28469425]Why does every game have to be an entirely new concept? Don't fix what isn't broken, not a hard concept.[/QUOTE]
Are you literally retarded?
"Don't fix what isn't broken."
So what, we shouldn't have kept moving on from fucking Mario because oh man everyone knows Mario was a hit, why bother with anything else right? If you want to buy the same game over and over again be my guest, but don't spew your stupid all over a discussion with some actual worth. There's a difference between innovation, and fixing what's broken. Maybe you'd know that if you weren't spending your time stalking me across threads and rating me dumb to gain a sense of self worth.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;28469452]Are you literally retarded?
"Don't fix what's broken."
So what, we shouldn't have kept moving on from fucking Mario because oh man everyone knows Mario was a hit, why bother with anything else right? If you want to buy the same game over and over again be my guest, but don't spew your stupid all over a discussion with some actual worth. There's a difference between innovation, and fixing what's broken. Maybe you'd know that if you weren't spending your time stalking me across threads and rating me dumb to gain a sense of self worth.[/QUOTE]
I think he said "Don't fix what [I]isn't[/I] broken"
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28469518]I think he said "Don't fix what [I]isn't[/I] broken"[/QUOTE]
Typo :v:
But anyway back to the point of my post, is there anything new to distinguish the game from other Battlefield games?
I know I really liked Bad Company 2 because of the engine and because the destruction and different classes/loadouts + the squad setup made it really interesting,
I'm just worried because they haven't released anything special about the game.
[QUOTE=Kopimi;28469541]Typo :v:
But anyway back to the point of my post, is there anything new to distinguish the game from other Battlefield games?
I know I really liked Bad Company 2 because of the engine and because the destruction and different classes/loadouts + the squad setup made it really interesting,
I'm just worried because they haven't released anything special about the game.[/QUOTE]
If you've read anything in the thread, you know this is a whole new ballgame. No longer are you stuck with minimal destruction, as with Battlefield 2. Whole cities can be leveled and there are many features other than that (read OP, I think it has some stuff).
In short, it's Battlefield 2 combined with Bad Company 2, injected with the shit Charlie Sheen's on.
[QUOTE=Erebus.;28469701]If you've read anything in the thread, you know this is a whole new ballgame. No longer are you stuck with minimal destruction, as with Battlefield 2. Whole cities can be leveled and there are many features other than that (read OP, I think it has some stuff).
In short, it's Battlefield 2 combined with Bad Company 2, injected with the shit Charlie Sheen's on.[/QUOTE]
That sounds pretty cool provided all the added Charlie Sheen doesn't make my face melt off.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
