Honestly, the graphics and sound are in all respects immaculate and well done, but the gameplay itself seems to be a bit too reminiscent of BC2. It just doesn't seem enough like the true Battlefield games in these videos, but I'll keep optimistic for when I actually play the game.
[QUOTE=V1ro;31242848]Honestly, the graphics and sound are in all respects immaculate and well done, but the gameplay itself seems to be a bit too reminiscent of BC2. It just doesn't seem enough like the true Battlefield games in these videos, but I'll keep optimistic for when I actually play the game.[/QUOTE]
I honestly think it's because of the map, imo.
[QUOTE=jrj996;31242921]I honestly think it's because of the map, imo.[/QUOTE]
This, I'm going to wait till I see a video of 64 players conquest, the true way it's meant to be played. Because right now looking at these videos I didn't really see anything that great, to me it looked like it tried to be BF2 (which is a good thing) in a BC2 style.
It was just weird to watch, hopefully a 64 player conquest battle will get rid of any doubts in my mind.
I lol'd when I saw they forgot to block their names in the kill feed.
[editline]20th July 2011[/editline]
also lol at the mag being in the barrel glitch.
I can't wait for this
I thought I'd be the last to say this, and I can anticipate the shower of boxes, but it looks like it plays like CoD, BC and Homefront. The aural and visual sides of things looks very nice and all but at the end of the day it looks like virtually nothing's changed since BC2, gameplay wise. That said I've only watched 3 of the videos. I expect the larger maps will be better.
[editline]21st July 2011[/editline]
Fucking ninjas.
i think the visuals/audio are superb and it's what i'd expect from an AAA studio
but the gameplay looks really just as generic as BC2...
[QUOTE=Morbo!!!;31244838]I thought I'd be the last to say this, and I can anticipate the shower of boxes, but it looks like it plays like CoD, BC and Homefront. The aural and visual sides of things looks very nice and all but at the end of the day it looks like virtually nothing's changed since BC2, gameplay wise. That said I've only watched 3 of the videos. I expect the larger maps will be better.
[editline]21st July 2011[/editline]
Fucking ninjas.[/QUOTE]
Wait, it looks like nothing changed since BC2 but it looks like it plays like CoD? Are you saying BC2 plays like CoD? I don't think there will ever be an FPS in the present world that doesn't feel the same for you then.
[QUOTE=Crazy_Farmer;31244857]
but the gameplay looks really just as generic as BC2...[/QUOTE]What were you expecting? Something else than people with guns shooting each other?
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;31237825]Of course. They can't have people completely leveling buildings because it would change the dynamics of the map too much. Some things are fully destructible, some aren't. Everyone wants crazy dynamic destruction but they don't realize how much it would fuck the dynamics of the entire game up. I wouldn't want to end up playing on completely flattened maps, would you?[/QUOTE]
Flattening the entire map would take a long time. Wouldn't be fun if it's flattened after 15 minutes, but if after a 3 hour battle there is nothing but rubble it would be awesome (also because after 3 hours the match is about to end, even if the server set an obscene amount of tickets).
A server side option would be nice, just a "Completely destroyable maps yes/no".
Right, then there's the whole optimization issue which I think you totally forgot about.
wtf? no headshots 360 noscopes and quickscoping ? wat a fuckin scrub game
It looks alright, as long as the maps are still very big like bf2. I am looking forward more to Red Orchestra 2 though.
[QUOTE=MaverickIB;31237825]Of course. They can't have people completely leveling buildings because it would change the dynamics of the map too much. Some things are fully destructible, some aren't. Everyone wants crazy dynamic destruction but they don't realize how much it would fuck the dynamics of the entire game up. I wouldn't want to end up playing on completely flattened maps, would you?[/QUOTE]
I think it would be near fucking impossible to make everything on a map flattened.
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't some buildings not destructible for balance purposes?
Recommended System requirements (from FAQ)
OS: Windows 7 or Vista (SP1)
Installed: Origin
CPU: Quadcore @ 2.0 GHz or faster
RAM: 4GB or more
Hard Drive: 7.25 GB free disk space
Video: 256 MB or greater
DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card with latest drivers (AMD 11.5 or later, nVidia 275.33 or later)
Sound: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card
Internet: broadband connection
[QUOTE=V1ro;31242848]Honestly, the graphics and sound are in all respects immaculate and well done, but the gameplay itself seems to be a bit too reminiscent of BC2. It just doesn't seem enough like the true Battlefield games in these videos, but I'll keep optimistic for when I actually play the game.[/QUOTE]
Its RUSH.
of course it would remind you of BC2
I'll have to see. Still looks too much like Bad Company 2 and MoH for my tastes currently.
UPDATE
OFFICIAL Battlefield 3: Paris Multiplayer Gameplay from the Battlefield youtube account has been added to the OP
[editline]21st July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Priori;31242088]Well the videos are from the alpha. Wouldn't they wait until later to put in new sounds?[/QUOTE]
They can't be this late in development and still call it an alpha. I'm pretty sure they're just calling it an alpha so that they can later do a beta.
I know it may seem "generic" but the fact that this game is the most well made modern war shooter I've ever seen is awesome. Look at CoD, Medal of Honor or Homefront, they don't have this much love of attention to details, it really looks like a solid game.
fuck these games are getting better and better graphic wise.
im gona end up spending twice as much money buying graphic cards and a better power supply
I'll bet Activision is shitting themselves right now.
[QUOTE=Dirf;31251794]I'll bet Activision is shitting themselves right now.[/QUOTE]
Do you really think that Activision cares of what they deliver to people that buy their shitty products?
Because they do not.
why these people have the game?
[QUOTE=Civil;31254613]Do you really think that Activision cares of what they deliver to people that buy their shitty products?
Because they do not.[/QUOTE]
Their products aren't horrible (albeit repetetive), because if they were, no one would buy them, and the Call of Duty franchise would die out, leaving only the hardcore fans left.
Also, if people are enjoying their games over and over again, of course they're not going to mess with their golden formula; it would be like Coke-a-Cola changing the taste of their drink.
[editline]12:00[/editline]
These gameplay videos are making me so excited!
[editline]21st July 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=falcont2t;31255441]why these people have the game?[/QUOTE]
Closed Alpha, and you can only be invited.
See more here: [url]https://bf3alpha.battlefield.com/includes/inc_help.php?[/url]
i really hope they fix the EoTech sight so it's a proper hologram, instead of looking like someone taped a crosshair on the optic
[QUOTE=phenomomnom;31246199]Recommended System requirements (from FAQ)
OS: Windows 7 or Vista (SP1)
Installed: Origin
CPU: Quadcore @ 2.0 GHz or faster
RAM: 4GB or more
Hard Drive: 7.25 GB free disk space
Video: 256 MB or greater
DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card with latest drivers (AMD 11.5 or later, nVidia 275.33 or later)
Sound: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible card
Internet: broadband connection[/QUOTE]
Those specs are only for the alpha tech test, meaning you need a good computer to be a alpha tester; currently.
[QUOTE=jrj996;31258210]Those specs are only for the alpha tech test, meaning you need a good computer to be a alpha tester; currently.[/QUOTE]
loads of ram, but not so much of video ram lol
i hope your comment means battlefield 3 itself will require less for a fluid gameplay right?
I take back calling this game "Bad Dull Field 3"
[QUOTE=meepugh;31234899]There better not be as much smoke and dust as Bad Company 2.[/QUOTE]
I heard that every bullet hit gives off more smoke than 3 smoke grenades.
[QUOTE=ultra_bright;31261025]I heard that every bullet hit gives off more smoke than 3 smoke grenades.[/QUOTE]I think they meant as in particle count.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.