Battlefield 3 v2 - Now with 900% more Battlefields
3,000 replies, posted
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;29946112]"Alright hands up who hires professional character designers...Anyone? Anyone? THAT'S RIGHT, ME."
I say the hell with customization, it takes away from the real experience of the Battlefield series and that is [B]WORKING AS A FUCKING TEAM.[/B] Customization encourages "LoL CoD LONE WULF STYLE TIGER FAMAS LoL"[/QUOTE]
Or you could go with customization that makes sense.
And how does customization encourage lone wolfing? Just because CoD has it and CoD does not encourage teamwork doesn't mean that the customization is the root cause to this. It's like saying that atheism causes obesity in cats.
Customization is good, if it makes sense. Letting people decide if they want kneepads on their characters, or not, makes sense. Letting people decide what color their uniform should have or if they should have pants on or not does not.
Same with weapons. Letting people add attachments makes sense even from a real world standpoint, as most armies will let their soldier choose whatever attachments they want.
[QUOTE=clanratc;29946829]Or you could go with customization that makes sense.
And how does customization encourage lone wolfing? Just because CoD has it and CoD does not encourage teamwork doesn't mean that the customization is the root cause to this. It's like saying that atheism causes obesity in cats.
Customization is good, if it makes sense. Letting people decide if they want kneepads on their characters, or not, makes sense. Letting people decide what color their uniform should have or if they should have pants on or not does not.
Same with weapons. Letting people add attachments makes sense even from a real world standpoint, as most armies will let their soldier choose whatever attachments they want.[/QUOTE]
Seriously I want a flight suit when I'm flying a jet god dam it.
[QUOTE=LittleDogX;29937380]As long as they don't make it possible for people to run around in underwear (BFHeroes) then I don't really care.[/QUOTE]
I was one of those people
[QUOTE=mastermaul;29939737]I hope they don't have character customization.
Combat doesn't feel like combat if infantry don't look like infantry.[/QUOTE]
Good customization would be minor, like knee pads and what not, a visor on your helmet, a wind breaker, etc.
[QUOTE=clanratc;29946829]Customization is good, if it makes sense. Letting people decide if they want kneepads on their characters, or not, makes sense. Letting people decide what color their uniform should have or if they should have pants on or not does not.
Same with weapons. Letting people add attachments makes sense even from a real world standpoint, as most armies will let their soldier choose whatever attachments they want.[/QUOTE]
I agree with this 100%
[QUOTE=clanratc;29946829]Or you could go with customization that makes sense.
And how does customization encourage lone wolfing? Just because CoD has it and CoD does not encourage teamwork doesn't mean that the customization is the root cause to this. It's like saying that atheism causes obesity in cats.
Customization is good, if it makes sense. Letting people decide if they want kneepads on their characters, or not, makes sense. Letting people decide what color their uniform should have or if they should have pants on or not does not.
Same with weapons. Letting people add attachments makes sense even from a real world standpoint, as most armies will let their soldier choose whatever attachments they want.[/QUOTE]
I'm quite against attachments in BF. Don't know why. Maybe I just like rigid classes where one's job cannot be done by another.
I'm just scared that people will find out that, for a theoretical example, Assault classes fare better/just as good as support in close range combat because of a few attachments they slap on and the whole map will be 70% assault classes.
To simplify: I want rigid classes that have no substitute with clear defined uniforms for each faction, even if that means sacrificing customization.
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;29949378]I'm quite against attachments in BF. Don't know why. Maybe I just like rigid classes where one's job cannot be done by another.
I'm just scared that people will find out that, for a theoretical example, Assault classes fare better/just as good as support in close range combat because of a few attachments they slap on and the whole map will be 70% assault classes.
To simplify: I want rigid classes that have no substitute with clear defined uniforms for each faction, even if that means sacrificing customization.[/QUOTE]
That's easy to fix. Just make it so that each class has a definite number of class-specific uniforms/clothes. Of course, it might require more assets but you are still keeping the uniqueness and offering some amount of customization.
[QUOTE=Scar;29888943]I hope it has character customisation like Rainbow Six: Vegas 2, minus camo patterns and purely visual.
Would be cool, IMO.
But what do I know ? :smith:[/QUOTE]
-From that video thing
Or instead of custom player models why not just randomly generated ones (just enough so that you can still tell its class but its not like they are all clones)
[QUOTE=PunchedInFac;29949378]I'm quite against attachments in BF. Don't know why. Maybe I just like rigid classes where one's job cannot be done by another.
I'm just scared that people will find out that, for a theoretical example, Assault classes fare better/just as good as support in close range combat because of a few attachments they slap on and the whole map will be 70% assault classes.
To simplify: I want rigid classes that have no substitute with clear defined uniforms for each faction, even if that means sacrificing customization.[/QUOTE]
I see your point, but there is nothing stopping them from locking certain attachments (like underbarrel grenade launchers) to the assault class. There is nothing wrong with letting people attach things like foregrips, IR lasers, scopes etc. I agree with you that the classes shouldn't overlap because of attachments, but I don't agree that weapon customization shouldn't be in the game because of it.
As for uniforms; again I see your point. But there is nothing stopping them from having distinct uniforms for each class that still allows for a certain degree of customization. Things like red crosses on the medic's headgear, the guillie-suit of the sniper class, spare ammo on the support class etc. All of that works without sacrificing customization, just have the telltale signs of the class be unchangeable and have the rest be customizable (within a reasonable limit).
As far as I can tell based off the trailers, it's a given that there will be customization whether we like it or not. DICE wants to cater to the console gamers, as well as the fact that they used Bad Company as a test bed for weapon attachments.
[QUOTE=tesher07;29954263]As far as I can tell based off the trailers, it's a given that there will be customization whether we like it or not. DICE wants to cater to the console gamers, as well as the fact that they used Bad Company as a test bed for weapon attachments.[/QUOTE]
Customization != console gamers fault. I believe ArmA2 allows for a bit of customization of your weapons, is that a console game? No? In fact, it is one of the most realistic games on the market and requires you to work as a team.
Okay then, your point is invalidated.
[QUOTE=tesher07;29954263]As far as I can tell based off the trailers, it's a given that there will be customization whether we like it or not. DICE wants to cater to the console gamers, as well as the fact that they used Bad Company as a test bed for weapon attachments.[/QUOTE]
Customization has nothing to do with consoles. Just being able to personalize your character is a nice touch, and it adds something to unlock for progressing up the ranks (I'd rather unlock cosmetic things than attachments and weapons etc.).
[QUOTE=tesher07;29954263]As far as I can tell based off the trailers, it's a given that there will be customization whether we like it or not. DICE wants to cater to the console gamers, as well as the fact that they used Bad Company as a test bed for weapon attachments.[/QUOTE]
2142 had customization sort of
I don't care how hyped you all are for this game. The fact that they are planning to rip us off with DLC 4 months prior to release sickens me and reminds me of all the things I hate a lot of other game companies for and I feel like a fucking moron for thinking Dice/EA was any different.
[QUOTE=kaskade700;29955168]I don't care how hyped you all are for this game. The fact that they are planning to rip us off with DLC 4 months prior to release sickens me and reminds me of all the things I hate a lot of other game companies for and I feel like a fucking moron for thinking Dice/EA was any different.[/QUOTE]
Whether you like it or not, this is how it will become with every game producer in the future.
We don't/might not like the idea of giving up our old habits just to improve/evolve/progress, but such is life.
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;29955382]Whether you like it or not, this is how it will become with every game producer in the future.
We don't/might not like the idea of giving up our old habits just to [b]improve/evolve/progress[/b], but such is life.[/QUOTE]
The problem is, No matter how hard people keep screaming that it's progression, improvement and evolvement... It's still regression. Lesser content for more money is regression. That the market is starved for innovation because they're too busy emulating one game is also regression if anything. reminds me of when Doom was first released. Followed by a big boom for a few months and THEN we were locked tight until 1998 when shooter devs started thinking themselves again.
[QUOTE=Cree8ive;29955382]Whether you like it or not, this is how it will become with every game producer in the future.
We don't/might not like the idea of giving up our old habits just to improve/evolve/progress, but such is life.[/QUOTE]
Improvement is not a game with already made content released at a later date for more money. Evolve? Yeah, we're all so dumb fuck stupid that we but into it, but then again the concept has always been around, but back then it was in the form of much more content rich expansion packs. Progress yeah sure, extreme good progress for the developers, extremely regression for the consumers.
The final release of [url=http://www.moddb.com/mods/battlefield-1918]Battlefield 1918[/url] is out and you all should play it.
[QUOTE=mastermaul;29958153]The final release of [url=http://www.moddb.com/mods/battlefield-1918]Battlefield 1918[/url] is out and you all should play it.[/QUOTE]
Not for Battlefield 2? Bah. Personally I find the African and Middle Eastern theaters of WWI to be the most interesting over the Western and Eastern Fronts.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;29958204]Not for Battlefield 2? Bah. Personally I find the African and Middle Eastern theaters of WWI to be the most interesting over the Western and Eastern Fronts.[/QUOTE]
There are quite a few African and Middle Eastern maps.
So.
I'm going to play BF2142 today somehow, maybe I'll contact EA and try to get them to fix the fucking thing again
[QUOTE=FalcoLombardi;29948401]I was one of those people[/QUOTE]
It was hilarious in BFHeroes, and while it would still look hilarious, it would be be stupid in BF3 since it's just a bit more realistic than BFHeroes.
on customization:
i've seen pics of dudes in multicam FROG uniforms and pics / video of them in desert marpat FROG
probably one of the options for customization then, camouflages
[QUOTE=Jemminaag;29958854]on customization:
i've seen pics of dudes in multicam FROG uniforms and pics / video of them in desert marpat FROG
probably one of the options for customization then, camouflages[/QUOTE]
That's really stupid, I'd like my team to look like a team.
Uniforms exist for a reason.
Unrelated but the medic from BC2 looks exactly like my friend
your friend is dumb looking
Well he's got a hot girlfriend so he's probably doing better than you
not seeing much of a correlation there except the beret
Ok so if they are inclined on customization or the fact that you can work to achieve something, why not do what they did for BF2 and have unlockable weapons?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
