[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28597274][URL="http://img96.imageshack.us/i/notimpressed.jpg/"][img_thumb]http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/9748/notimpressed.jpg[/img_thumb][/URL][/QUOTE]
I fucking HATE cartoons that do these things. paint the character in a (n artistic) vulgar light. Think something as gross as cow and chicken from Cartoon network or I.R. baboons ass getting close-ups all of the time. Cartoons are supposed to be unicorns and rabbits, not nasal raping a cow with a chicken or making a sponge (or in this case, an octopus) look like some half rotten to death cancer/aids patient.
What the hell Cartoons! /off topic.
[QUOTE=Bomimo;28597708]I fucking HATE cartoons that do these things. paint the character in a (n artistic) vulgar light. Think something as gross as cow and chicken from Cartoon network or I.R. baboons ass getting close-ups all of the time. Cartoons are supposed to be unicorns and rabbits, not nasal raping a cow with a chicken or making a sponge (or in this case, an octopus) look like some half rotten to death cancer/aids patient.
What the hell Cartoons! /off topic.[/QUOTE]
wat
[QUOTE=Bomimo;28597708]I fucking HATE cartoons that do these things. paint the character in a (n artistic) vulgar light. Think something as gross as cow and chicken from Cartoon network or I.R. baboons ass getting close-ups all of the time. Cartoons are supposed to be unicorns and rabbits, not nasal raping a cow with a chicken or making a sponge (or in this case, an octopus) look like some half rotten to death cancer/aids patient.
What the hell Cartoons! /off topic.[/QUOTE]
I disagree
ITT: Arguments about cartoons, duck terrorists, penguin majors and midget Taliban.
EDIT: Talking about penguins, new avatar!
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28569195]It's not pessimism. It's realizing that having large amount of players would actually be a negative towards gameplay and game development. It's also knowing that not everyone has top of the line hardware. Not everyone will be able to support 128 people in one match. Even if the engine was some kind of godsend and made even older computers able to run it, the maps would not be designed for it. Even if Dice decided to go out of their way and modify the maps a bit for 128 player size, it would still just be a terrible cluster fuck.[/QUOTE]
This is the year 2011 for fucks sake, if you already don't have atleast upgraded your computer hardware in the last 5 years for gaming purposes then I don't know what to say. Every new game requires more power than the last one and they will continue to do so.
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28569195]the maps would not be designed for it.[/QUOTE]
Are you fucking kidding me
Mod teams will make maps that will suit such amounts of players, game developers will also make such maps to support such amount of players.
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28569195]It would also just escalate into 95% vehicle warfare making infantry almost useless against the amount of vehicles there would be.[/QUOTE]
There's are such amazing things called ratio, teamwork, coordination, and most importand of all, [B]common sense[/B]. There are limited amount tanks compared to infantry, tanks are taken out with teamwork and coordination. See a tank in a field? For fucks sake get in cover, hide, and hit it when you have a good aim at it's vulnerable sides. If you were in the middle of the open field when it appears and kills you its your own fucking fault for being dumb enought to run there in the first place. Coordinate with your team's tanks, inform them about enemy positions, and support if possible during their encounter. Ambush enemy tanks along with your squad and plan ahead when happens what so that jackass in your squad doesn't shoot at the wrong time.
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28569195]You could increase the amount of ammo that an AT/Possibly AA class would have, but then that would ruin gameplay in 64 man servers since vehicles would become death traps. [/QUOTE]
Tank crews are supposed to move using the terrain's cover as much as possible and be for the lookout of enemy AT emplacements all the time.
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28569195]If they didn't increase the number of vehicles people would complain about maps being too big and having to walk across them.[/QUOTE]
Ask someone for a ride or tag along with someone.
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28569195]High amounts of players don't work. It becomes a nuisance to gameplay and game balance. It's not pessimism, it's thinking about things practically. If there was some kind of way to balance 128 players without ruining gameplay of 64, 32, or 16 player servers then okay that would be awesome. The amount of work they would need to put into making 128 players possible would most likely decrease the overall value of the game. I would rather have High quality 64 player gameplay than low/medium quality 128 player gameplay.[/QUOTE]
Oh for christ sake.
If the game pushes you for teamwork, the players also will do so, nothing is more fun than being in a squad that has a actively communicating leader that coordinates with you and the team's commander. This even happens in the vanilla BF2, only that is needed is being active and motivating the people and the squad to reach the common goal.
For another good example; Project Reality.
No, wait. Every single argument you made can be answered with Project Reality.
[QUOTE=acds;28597021]It was also most probably running at the highest resolution they could push on the screen (so 1920x1080 at least, probably more). Also when they run these demos they absolutely max the shit out of the game, probably even above what you can push it in the game without editing the files (not to mention it's in alpha, it only gets better optimized from here on, worst case scenario it stays like this, but it won't get any heavier on the computer).
Was that i7 a 2600k or a 900-something?
So yeah in short, fucking awesome news.[/QUOTE]
No idea, but yeah your right, I forgot to mention the resolution. I myself run a 22" widescreen at 1440 x 900, so I probably wont need such a rig to pump out those graphics. I could probably get really good if not max settings if im lucky on my Q6600 @ 2.7, 4GB ram and my soon to be 560/570 (atm its a 9800GTX, but even with that I can run Crysis 2 on hardcore settings).
[i]Then go play Project Reality[/i]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28598364][i]Then go play Project Reality[/i][/QUOTE]
How about you go play BF2 if you like BF as it is.
[QUOTE=maqzek;28598386]How about you go play BF2 if you like BF as it is.[/QUOTE]
How about you leave the thread and never come back. :colbert:
[QUOTE=maqzek;28598386]How about you go play BF2 if you like BF as it is.[/QUOTE]
If you look for fun, vanilla battlefield is where it's at, teamwork and realism? Project Reality. Something inbetween? Point of Excistence 2. WW2 setting? Forgotten Hope 2.
Different mods for different tastes.
[QUOTE=Raiskauskone V2;28598407]If you look for fun, vanilla battlefield is where it's at, teamwork and realism? Project Reality. Something inbetween? Point of Excistence 2. WW2 setting? Forgotten Hope 2.
Different mods for different tastes.[/QUOTE]
Vanilla Battlefield has the capabilities of team work, just not realism. I know that people will disagree with me, but I think Battlefield 2's core idea was to more fun than just entirely realistic.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
Hence why every five seconds I'm going to hear "ARTILLERY, YOUR AREA!" while I'm trying to capture the Hotel in Karkand fffffffffff --
[QUOTE=Trinholdt;28598422]Vanilla Battlefield has the capabilities of team work, just not realism. I know that people will disagree with me, but I think Battlefield 2's core idea was to more fun than just entirely realistic.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
Hence why every five seconds I'm going to hear "ARTILLERY, YOUR AREA!" while I'm trying to capture the Hotel in Karkand fffffffffff --[/QUOTE]
Oh every game has possibilities for teamwork, didn't feel like adding that.
[QUOTE=Raiskauskone V2;28598438]Oh every game has possibilities for teamwork, didn't feel like adding that.[/QUOTE]
Don't be lazy. :smith:
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
augh page king here is shitty content
[img]http://ui05.gamespot.com/548/forgotcar_2.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Trinholdt;28598394]How about you leave the thread and never come back. :colbert:[/QUOTE]
How about no.
:colbert:
You guys are funny. People list some features from PR and you tell them to go play PR, yet when you list other features, it should be in BF3. What's up with that? This is not BF2HD, this is BF3. Games change, and if you like it or not, ideas and concepts come from different games.
[QUOTE=maqzek;28598469]How about no.
:colbert:
You guys are funny. People list some features from PR and you tell them to go play PR, yet when you list other features, it should be in BF3. What's up with that? This is not BF2HD, this is BF3. Games change, and if you like it or not, ideas and concepts come from different games.[/QUOTE]
Because PR features are incredibly niche and not good for general play. Most people don't want to walk for 40 minutes then get shot by someone they never saw. Most people don't want to have to read pages of documentation to do anything. Most people don't want a realism experience. I don't care how many masochistic neckbeards think Project Reality is fun, I don't want that shit in my Battlefield game. Wait for a mod or just play Project Reality.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28599109]Because PR features are incredibly niche and not good for general play. Most people don't want to walk for 40 minutes then get shot by someone they never saw. Most people don't want to have to read pages of documentation to do anything. Most people don't want a realism experience. I don't care how many masochistic neckbeards think Project Reality is fun, I don't want that shit in my Battlefield game. Wait for a mod or just play Project Reality.[/QUOTE]
Play Project Reality first before going on about summarizing it and calling it's players masochistic neckbeards, you just look like a regular "STOP LIKING WHAT I DON'T LIKE" jackass.
Well that's what they're doing until BF3 is out, so why in gods name are you all arguing about something that a game hasn't even got, or even released yet, oh yeah cause you're all whiney fucks.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28599109]Because PR features are incredibly niche and not good for general play. Most people don't want to walk for 40 minutes then get shot by someone they never saw. Most people don't want to have to read pages of documentation to do anything. Most people don't want a realism experience. I don't care how many masochistic neckbeards think Project Reality is fun, I don't want that shit in my Battlefield game. Wait for a mod or just play Project Reality.[/QUOTE]
PR really isn't that hard.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
Also, it's not your battlefield game.
You guys are owed nothing, you are nothing more than the consumer, the developers are the ones who own this game, this is their game, not yours. Lose your stupid sense of entitlement.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28599109]Because PR features are incredibly niche and not good for general play. Most people don't want to walk for 40 minutes then get shot by someone they never saw. Most people don't want to have to read pages of documentation to do anything. Most people don't want a realism experience. I don't care how many masochistic neckbeards think Project Reality is fun, I don't want that shit in my Battlefield game. Wait for a mod or just play Project Reality.[/QUOTE]
Stick with your squad, don't run around like a retard and use common sense. It's one of the best FPS experiences I've had. Also, you really don't need to read the manual. I picked up pretty much everything (sans helicopter and planes) in a couple hours of playing. And if you need to know a bind or how to do something, just ask.
[QUOTE=GetBent;28599235]Stick with your squad, don't run around like a retard and use common sense. It's one of the best FPS experiences I've had. Also, you really don't need to read the manual. I picked up pretty much everything (sans helicopter and planes) in a couple hours of playing. And if you need to know a bind or how to do something, just ask.[/QUOTE]
It's great fun with voice-chat, and hell, helicopters aren't that hard to fly either.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;28599109]Because PR features are incredibly niche and not good for general play. Most people don't want to walk for 40 minutes then get shot by someone they never saw. Most people don't want to have to read pages of documentation to do anything. Most people don't want a realism experience. I don't care how many masochistic neckbeards think Project Reality is fun, I don't want that shit in my Battlefield game. Wait for a mod or just play Project Reality.[/QUOTE]
Yeah because we're saying we want PR remake in BF3.
/s
[QUOTE=doommarine23;28599184]PR really isn't that hard.
[editline]14th March 2011[/editline]
Also, it's not your battlefield game.
You guys are owed nothing, you are nothing more than the consumer, the developers are the ones who own this game, this is their game, not yours. Lose your stupid sense of entitlement.[/QUOTE]
So they are the ones who's gonna buy it and play it allday erryday?
Two more days until the next trailer, we're probably going to see a boom in activity. The next OP is ready. My body is ready.
[QUOTE=maqzek;28599317]Yeah because we're saying we want PR remake in BF3.
/s
So they are the ones who's gonna buy it and allday erryday?[/QUOTE]
Sure, you can review it and all that jazz.
But you are not entitled to these games, nor are you really entitled to say it's YOUR game.
Battlefield is not YOURs nor MINE. It's Dice's and if they want to add certain features to THEIR game? Than I don't see why any of us should complain, unless they are shitty.
My point being, none of us own the game, so we shouldn't get all huffy over entitlement
[QUOTE=Spetzaz;28599324]Two more days until the next trailer, we're probably going to see a boom in activity. The next OP is ready. My body is ready.[/QUOTE]
I don't think my sperm count is ready.
[QUOTE=Imperfect;28599401]I don't think my sperm count is ready.[/QUOTE]
I don't have any left :(
[QUOTE=doommarine23;28599329]Sure, you can review it and all that jazz.
But you are not entitled to these games, nor are you really entitled to say it's YOUR game.
Battlefield is not YOURs nor MINE. It's Dice's and if they want to add certain features to THEIR game? Than I don't see why any of us should complain, unless they are shitty.
My point being, none of us own the game, so we shouldn't get all huffy over entitlement[/QUOTE]
My point being, why do they decide what's good for community and what's not? They said 256 players ain't fun. Community thinks otherwise. Who's right? Sure, we vote with our wallet and etc, but in the end, they are the ones getting a paycheck and praised/smites.
I'm not saying we should teach them how to make the game, but sometimes devs skip some of community feedback due to their secret reasons.
They are not indie either, so they can't say they are doing the game for themselves and however they want. If they are targeting specific audience, they should listen to this audience instead of going "HEY WE KNOW BETTER OK, BECAUSE WE ARE THE PERFECT DEV SO SHUT UP"
I guess this is all semantics.
You missed my point. My point is that I hate it when people say "My battlefield games"
It's not yours, it's techincally Dice's, but it's also the game's community as a whole. Not just yours. You didn't make it nor was it made for you.
[QUOTE=doommarine23;28599510]You missed my point. My point is that I hate it when people say "My battlefield games"
It's not yours, it's techincally Dice's, but it's also the game's community as a whole. Not just yours. You didn't make it nor was it made for you.[/QUOTE]
Ah. Yeah, you're right I guess.
I just thought you meant 'you' as in each one of you, instead of 'MEMEME JUST ME'
e:
Kinda my point too, since people were saying they don't want PR stuff in 'their BF' game.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
