You guys are dumb, I don't really care of the singleplayer is an hour long rail shooter if the multiplayer is good, which it will be.
[QUOTE=acds;28637087]Yeah, rocket launchers are made to penetrate, not bring down buildings (even if it somehow was a HE warhead, which I'm not even sure that rocket launcher has, it still would be far to small to bring down an hotel).[/QUOTE]
Penetrate? It all depends on the ammunition used. Not every projectile is used for anti-tank purposes.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT4#Projectiles[/url]
Though the AST projectile is more for blowing holes or blowing up bunkers rather than being able to bring down an entire building.
I can't understand why is everyone complaining about SP campaign being scripted. Who cares in a game like this. You play it once, enjoy the ride and move on to MP.
Rate me box or w/e but for what it's worth I found campaigns in recent COD games fun enough with all their linearity.
Well I don't really care if a rocket launcher took down a building, it's a video game, who cares if it's realistic or not?
And, boy it's so easy to piss off people on the BF3 forums, too easy. Never go there.
Video looked decent, but I'm pretty sure that sniper must have been completely shitfaced to have been missing EVERY SINGLE SHOT (at the most) at 100m.
Also, it didn't bring down the whole building...at least it doesn't look like it to me. Rocket hits, windows explode, dust flies out, chunks fly out, sign flies off, and that's it. It still looked overpowered as shit, but I don't think it collapsed the whole building.
Oh, and as far as new footage goes - knowing what the last part will be it was bit... boring. Not complaining tho.
Ok, like someone said - only thing that seemed weird was crawling. But anyhow.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;28637184]Penetrate? It all depends on the ammunition used. Not every projectile is used for anti-tank purposes.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT4#Projectiles[/url]
Though the AST projectile is more for blowing holes or blowing up bunkers rather than being able to bring down an entire building.[/QUOTE]
Yeah my bad, meant that they are not made for outright pulverizing things with the shockwave. None of them are made to blow large chunks out of a target such as a building, even AST and HEDP are just used to make mouse holes (which can be pretty big, but nowhere near enough to take down a hotel) and killing hostile personnel behind walls or inside buildings.
[QUOTE=John Freeman;28637226]I can't understand why is everyone complaining about SP campaign being scripted. Who cares in a game like this. You play it once, enjoy the ride and move on to MP.
Rate me box or w/e but for what it's worth I found campaigns in recent COD games fun enough with all their linearity.[/QUOTE]
I would like some replay value in singleplayer outside of completing the game on higher difficulty or what have you, but I mostly agree. I feel like CoD and Bad Company have essentially no replay value in their SP experiences.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;28637233]Well I don't really care if a rocket launcher took down a building, it's a video game, who cares if it's realistic or not?
And, boy it's so easy to piss off people on the BF3 forums, too easy. Never go there.[/QUOTE]
Well [B]if[/B] it uses dynamic destruction then it is pretty important because either the hotel was in a very weakened state (didn't look like it) or they gave the rocket some serious blasting power.
I'd imagine that the hotel coming down was scripted.
[QUOTE=rnate;28637240]Video looked decent, but I'm pretty sure that sniper must have been completely shitfaced to have been missing EVERY SINGLE SHOT (at the most) at 100m.[/QUOTE]
Singleplayer wouldn't be fun if they put the player and his AI team against competent foes.
That probably wasn't a sniper, more like a random guy who happened to find a sniper rifle and decided to hole himself in the buildings.
[QUOTE=John Freeman;28637226]I can't understand why is everyone complaining about SP campaign being scripted. Who cares in a game like this. You play it once, enjoy the ride and move on to MP.
Rate me box or w/e but for what it's worth I found campaigns in recent COD games fun enough with all their linearity.[/QUOTE]
Because if the destruction is dynamic then it's awesome, if it's scripted then it's not that special. It's not about the campaign, it's about the destruction.
Also it's the only thing they have given us so it's the only thing we can drool and complain over.
[QUOTE=acds;28637360]Well [B]if[/B] it uses dynamic destruction then it is pretty important because either the hotel was in a very weakened state (didn't look like it) or they gave the rocket some serious blasting power.
I'd imagine that the hotel coming down was scripted.[/QUOTE]
Well of course some things are still gonna be scripted, what, are you expecting every single piece of destruction in the game to happen dynamically?
Yeah the SP for at least the BF games has always been filler for the multiplayer aspect. I'm hoping that the SP for this gives enough freedom to replay it.
Why is everyone talking about the building collapsing? It doesn't look anything like collapsing. All that happened was the sign fell and some debris flew out.
[QUOTE=maqzek;28635792]How would devs know what and how to fix? And are you implying that best way to criticize the game is after launch when it's basically too late to change most stuff?[/QUOTE]
There's a difference between criticizing bugs and flaws and just complaining about it for the sake of not liking the game.
[editline]16th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;28637458]Why is everyone talking about the building collapsing? It doesn't look anything like collapsing. All that happened was the sign fell and some debris flew out.[/QUOTE]
I don't know but I don't think a rocket would blow out the majority of the windows in the building. At least in my opinion it looked like it was collapsing but then again, I've never been in a warzone nor have we seen the rest of the clip.
[QUOTE=evilweazel;28637425]Well of course some things are still gonna be scripted, what, are you expecting every single piece of destruction in the game to happen dynamically?[/QUOTE]
I am not no. Some people seem to be though.
[editline]16th March 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=acds;28637329]Yeah my bad, meant that they are not made for outright pulverizing things with the shockwave. None of them are made to blow large chunks out of a target such as a building, even AST and HEDP are just used to make mouse holes (which can be pretty big, but nowhere near enough to take down a hotel) and killing hostile personnel behind walls or inside buildings.[/QUOTE]
Remembered now that all that is unless it's thermobaric, those things can bring down buildings. AT-4 does not have that kind of warhead though, SMAW does.
[QUOTE=maqzek;28635792]How would devs know what and how to fix? And are you implying that best way to criticize the game is after launch when it's basically too late to change most stuff?[/QUOTE]
Surely they fix what the playerbase wasn't happy about from the BC games. And what's with the aggressive attitude of yours?
I am not implying that you shouldn't be allowed to criticize, in fact, I support a lot of which has been discussed here, but the tone and the tension from the last page sounded like people were complaining about the game as if it was a month from release.
I was merely pointing that out to people who might have forgotten that.
I don't think it brought down the building, but if it did, remember that there might be a major structural support there.
[editline]16th March 2011[/editline]
A comment I found on another website:
[QUOTE]
I saw the entire demo without any cuts at PAX last weekend and the aftermath looks great, there’s a good chuck of the side of the building missing and a raging fire going on inside..[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE='[CWG]RustySpannerz;28637550']
A comment I found on another website:[/QUOTE]
[I]Awesome![/I]
[QUOTE=acds;28637380]Because if the destruction is dynamic then it's awesome[/QUOTE]
It's not. You're dreaming.
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28637528]Surely they fix what the playerbase wasn't happy about from the BC games. And what's with the aggressive attitude of yours? [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28637528]Surely they fix what the playerbase wasn't happy about from the BC games.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28637528] from the BC games.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28637528]BC games.[/QUOTE]
This is BF3 not BC3, though.
Sigh, sorry for not stating the obvious, I meant they take all of what they did wrong from the BC games and make it into a modern/better version of BF2.
There must be something they learned from making the BC games that they can do better on BF3 right?
[QUOTE=PieClock;28637767]It's not. You're dreaming.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=acds;28637502]I am not no. Some people seem to be though.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;28637816]There must be something they learned from making the BC games that they can do better on BF3 right?[/QUOTE]
Only thing I REALLY missed in BC2, is the commo rose.
[QUOTE=Lizzrd;28638060]Only thing I REALLY missed in BC2, is the commo rose.[/QUOTE]
I missed jets, I missed the big maps, I missed the team work, the class system, the bigger focus on vehicles, the commander, I missed most of what made BF2 great.
Some great sounds and visuals but Im catching a hint of the "delta foxtrot tango down move up to echo" stuff. Not that I don't like the idea of SP, but BF2 is arcade by nature and they wouldn't really do a realistic singleplayer campaign, so instead it's going to be sort of.. cheesy. Slow motion and "soldier talk" and what have you.
Show me the multiplayer! :frown:
All the features they showed were nice, though. Hope that sort of destruction works in MP. The only thing I could complain about is how damn slow that M136 projectile moves... they should speed it up.. I hate it how all games make them super slow and inaccurate. There should be a big "thoomph" sound and the thing should jet off as a black and yellow streak and slam into it's target, would be way more satisfying.
No offense to them, but I think this looks way better. Another case where doing it realistically would be more fun.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3xsMqHu56g#t=0m24s[/media]
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28638172]Some great sounds and visuals but Im catching a hint of the "delta foxtrot tango down move up to echo" stuff. Not that I don't like the idea of SP, but BF2 is arcade by nature and they wouldn't really do a realistic singleplayer campaign, so instead it's going to be sort of.. cheesy. Slow motion and "soldier talk" and what have you.
Show me the multiplayer! :frown:
All the features they showed were nice, though. Hope that sort of destruction works in MP. The only thing I could complain about is how damn slow that M136 projectile moves... they should speed it up.. I hate it how all games make them super slow and inaccurate. There should be a big "thoomph" sound and the thing should jet off as a black and yellow streak and slam into it's target, would be way more satisfying.
No offense to them, but I think this looks way better. Another case where doing it realistically would be more fun.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3xsMqHu56g#t=0m24s[/media][/QUOTE]
Problem is they have to balance it out a bit. Having the rocket get there near instantly wouldn't be very fair for the person on the receiving end.
True, but these are disposable AT weapons, you only get 1-2.. would be cool if they had a slower larger, like the guided ones in BF2, then have the lightweight and disposable AT4 for destroying buildings and pestering tanks with speed.
There could be the "Lightweight AT" loadout with a rifle and M136, then there could be the "Heavy AT" with a smaller carbine or smg and large guided AT weapon like the SRAW
[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-x1tw_sRDY[/media]
Fault Line Part 2
singleplayer looks really weak but I have my hopes up for the multiplayer.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
