Anyone noticed the city at around the 12-second mark?

#1 Edited by AuthenticM (3699 posts) -

At around 00:12, we seem to get a glimpse of a city with lit-up skyscrapers. Maybe the battlefield won't be the Middle East? What if it's the US? It seems to be the fad these days, ever since Modern Warfare 2. 
 
EDIT: hey, what if, whether or not there is a single player campaign, the narrative framework follows what is established at the end of Bad Company 2? Which is Russia invading the US (from what I seem to remember).

#2 Posted by B0nd07 (1697 posts) -

Might I suggest checking out some of the other threads?
 
Like this one:

From Webhallen (a Swedish retailer):

"...
In Battlefield 3, players step into the role of the elite U.S. Marines where they will experience heart-pounding single player missions and competitive multiplayer actions ranging across diverse locations from around the globe including Paris, Tehran and New York

...
Features:
...

• Urban Combat — Take the fight to iconic and unexpected places in the USA, Middle East, and Europe including claustrophobic streets, metropolitan downtowns, and open, vehicle-friendly landscapes as you fight your way through the war of tomorrow."

 
So, you're right in your observation; the game will take place in more than just Middle Eastern desserts.
Online
#3 Posted by RsistncE (4496 posts) -

I'd rather them focus completely on the multiplayer and just skip the single player entirely. It's not exactly what the Battlefield franchise is known for...

#4 Posted by B0nd07 (1697 posts) -
@RsistncE: Yeah, I'd rather the single player (and co-op) be the traditional multiplayer but with bots.
Online
#5 Posted by kishan6 (1914 posts) -

Please tell me that some of it will be in dubai.... its the perfect place for a battleground 
half of the map is some of the worst slums you've ever seen and then the other half is the most amazing city youve ever seen

#6 Edited by mikeeegeee (1552 posts) -

I knew it. Larger scale destruction. A full range of building sizes. All(?) destructible. This alone will improve the gameplay leaps and bounds. The addition of jets to the new engine, with the (presumably) updated destruction capacity, will make this game a landmark in the war simulation genre. Fully realized physics, combat, map size, and (hopefully) destruction on a larger scale will make this one for the books. This will be the game that prompts me to build a gaming PC.

#7 Posted by AhmadMetallic (18955 posts) -

ya

#8 Posted by PhatSeeJay (3322 posts) -

The trailer scream urban warfare with that Russian jet shooting down a civilian helicopter!
I for one wouldn't mind the chance to put some serious dents in the New York skyscrapers or blow off one of the supports for the Eiffel Tower and see it Frostbite 2.0. 
 
Hey, one can dream!

#9 Posted by Enigma777 (6057 posts) -
@B0nd07 said:
" @RsistncE: Yeah, I'd rather the single player (and co-op) be the traditional multiplayer but with bots. "
Screw that. It sucked in UT3 and it will suck here too.
#10 Posted by Vitor (2810 posts) -
@Enigma777 said:
" @B0nd07 said:
" @RsistncE: Yeah, I'd rather the single player (and co-op) be the traditional multiplayer but with bots. "
Screw that. It sucked in UT3 and it will suck here too. "
No way they'd ship a MP only game though. Not for $60 anyway.  
 
Clearly Dice have learnt a thing or two from the BC series though so I'm expecting a decent effort offline at the very least. Still, it's not something this series needs. Frankly, I'd just be happy if they don't stray too far from the BF2 formula. 
#11 Posted by Enigma777 (6057 posts) -
@Vitor: Yea, I'm expecting a decent SP as well since I really liked BC2's. I was merely commenting on how the suggestion that the SP should basically be the MP maps with bots is a terrible idea.
#12 Posted by Underachiever007 (2468 posts) -

Guys, please stop talking about this game now. It's getting me excited.

#13 Posted by Vitor (2810 posts) -
@Enigma777: It is a terrible idea. Has been awful in every game that's implemented it as it just feels lazy. 
 
Hopefully with the amount of guys Dice recently pulled in from other projects, this means they're giving both sides, MP and SP, full attention. 
#14 Posted by AuthenticM (3699 posts) -

I would not be surprised if the game had a true single player campaign. I don't know if EA is willing to ship a game that is multiplayer only this time around, especially if it's coming to consoles. The games industry is pretty different from when BF2 came out all those years ago. Who knows; we'll see. I wouldn't mind it, as long as multiplayer is the main focus and does not get compromised.

#15 Posted by Sumbog (481 posts) -
@mikeeegeee: There are jets? are the maps gonna be big enough to support them while keeping the massive sense of speed you want from a jet?
#16 Posted by Joelteon7 (100 posts) -
@AuthenticM said:  hey, what if, whether or not there is a single player campaign, the narrative framework follows what is established at the end of Bad Company 2? Which is Russia invading the US (from what I seem to remember). " 
 
BC2's SP end shot was followed immediately by the MP. If you check out their descriptions and look at the locations, a logical timeline emerges and you essentially fight in the larger battle displayed. 
 
That being said, it's been suggested by a few people that perhaps we'll fight IN that larger war anyhow. Potentially expect a cameo from the B-Company folks.
#17 Posted by Mr_Skeleton (5137 posts) -

Yeah it totally had buildings and stuff.

#18 Posted by Jayross (2365 posts) -

"In Battlefield 3, players step into the role of the elite U.S. Marines where they will experience heart-pounding single player missions and competitive multiplayer actions ranging across diverse locations from around the globe including Paris, Tehran and New York."

So, New York, Paris... Tehran? This is going to be crazy!!

#19 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -

I'm really upset at this game taking place in Tehran for no apparent reason. Plus, they have no idea as to how to realistically and effectively display that city.

#20 Posted by B0nd07 (1697 posts) -
@Vitor said:
" @Enigma777 said:
" @B0nd07 said:
" @RsistncE: Yeah, I'd rather the single player (and co-op) be the traditional multiplayer but with bots. "
Screw that. It sucked in UT3 and it will suck here too. "
No way they'd ship a MP only game though. Not for $60 anyway. "
Who says a multiplayer only game would cost $60?  I'm pretty sure I picked up BF2 for around $40, and it's only been recently that PC games started costing $60 (no thanks to console games).  They were $50 for the longest time.
 
Besides, it's only what I'd prefer.  It actually worked pretty well in BF2; even if the AI wasn't as smart as you'd like.  The core franchise doesn't need a campaign, but if it turns out great, that's fine too.
Online
#21 Posted by Jayross (2365 posts) -
@ISuperGamerI
I'm really upset at this game taking place in Tehran for no apparent reason. Plus, they have no idea as to how to realistically and effectively display that city.
I'm upset that it is taking place in New York.

Wait, no I'm not, because that's dumb.
#22 Posted by mikeeegeee (1552 posts) -
#23 Posted by canucks23 (1087 posts) -
@mikeeegeee said:
" I knew it. Larger scale destruction. A full range of building sizes. All(?) destructible. This alone will improve the gameplay leaps and bounds. The addition of jets to the new engine, with the (presumably) updated destruction capacity, will make this game a landmark in the war simulation genre. Fully realized physics, combat, map size, and (hopefully) destruction on a larger scale will make this one for the books. This will be the game that prompts me to build a gaming PC. "
Gah! Stop, you're getting me to excited now.
#24 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -
@Jayross said:
" @ISuperGamerI
I'm really upset at this game taking place in Tehran for no apparent reason. Plus, they have no idea as to how to realistically and effectively display that city.
I'm upset that it is taking place in New York. Wait, no I'm not, because that's dumb. "
It's not dumb cause we are talking about a Middle Eastern country and in just about every video game, they are misrepresented. Even when the Middle Eastern characters talk, it's gibberish and not the correct language.
#25 Posted by Jayross (2365 posts) -
@ISuperGamerI
@Jayross said:
" @ISuperGamerI
I'm really upset at this game taking place in Tehran for no apparent reason. Plus, they have no idea as to how to realistically and effectively display that city.
I'm upset that it is taking place in New York. Wait, no I'm not, because that's dumb. "
It's not dumb cause we are talking about a Middle Eastern country and in just about every video game, they are misrepresented. Even when the Middle Eastern characters talk, it's gibberish and not the correct language.
Okay, I understand where you are coming from. I was more thinking of multiplayer..

However, I hope DICE approaches Tehran carefully and is not overtly disrespectful or inaccurate.
#26 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -
@Jayross said:
" @ISuperGamerI
@Jayross said:
" @ISuperGamerI
I'm really upset at this game taking place in Tehran for no apparent reason. Plus, they have no idea as to how to realistically and effectively display that city.
I'm upset that it is taking place in New York. Wait, no I'm not, because that's dumb. "
It's not dumb cause we are talking about a Middle Eastern country and in just about every video game, they are misrepresented. Even when the Middle Eastern characters talk, it's gibberish and not the correct language.
Okay, I understand where you are coming from. I was more thinking of multiplayer.. However, I hope DICE approaches Tehran carefully and is not overtly disrespectful or inaccurate. "
Thanks I appreciate it and I will boycott DICE unless they do a good job at representing the city. Also, I wonder how the SP will incorporate into all of this.
#27 Posted by HarlequinRiot (1098 posts) -
@B0nd07 said:
" @Vitor said:
" @Enigma777 said:
" @B0nd07 said:
" @RsistncE: Yeah, I'd rather the single player (and co-op) be the traditional multiplayer but with bots. "
Screw that. It sucked in UT3 and it will suck here too. "
No way they'd ship a MP only game though. Not for $60 anyway. "
Who says a multiplayer only game would cost $60?  I'm pretty sure I picked up BF2 for around $40, and it's only been recently that PC games started costing $60 (no thanks to console games).  They were $50 for the longest time.
 
Besides, it's only what I'd prefer.  It actually worked pretty well in BF2; even if the AI wasn't as smart as you'd like.  The core franchise doesn't need a campaign, but if it turns out great, that's fine too. "
No way it won't be $60. EA is not going to release one of their biggest games of the year for under $60. It's going to have a story driven SP campaign whether anyone likes it or not. 
#28 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -
@Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:
 
Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?
 
Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz.
#29 Edited by Aurelito (721 posts) -
@Seppli said:

" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "

What bugs me is that they're probably gonna call Iranians "Arab", which they're certainly not, and will never be. I don't care about destroying the city, they might as well put the whole country into the game and nuke it, I won't care as long as they don't call Iranians Arab.
 
Edit: I'm desperate and I'm sure that they will call Iranians Arab. I don't know how to contact Dice and tell them about it. They probably won't care anyway, because there are no legal End-users for their game in Iran (there's lots of illegal users though).
#30 Posted by jakob187 (21642 posts) -
@RsistncE said:
" I'd rather them focus completely on the multiplayer and just skip the single player entirely. It's not exactly what the Battlefield franchise is known for... "
It's not like they DIDN'T focus on the multiplayer for Bad Company 2.  Hell, that multiplayer was pretty excellent.  Moreover, it happened to have a pretty good single player as well.  The same can be said for its predecessor. 
 
As long as the multiplayer is beefy and will keep my fingers on the keyboard, then I'm fine with it.  The single player would just be a bonus.
#31 Posted by KaosAngel (13765 posts) -

BF3 has a story mode?  O_o

#32 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -
@Seppli said:
" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "
What the heck are you talking about? Do you even know where Tehran is in the world?
#33 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -
@Aurelito said:
" @Seppli said:

" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "

What bugs me is that they're probably gonna call Iranians "Arab", which they're certainly not, and will never be. I don't care about destroying the city, they might as well put the whole country into the game and nuke it, I won't care as long as they don't call Iranians Arab.  Edit: I'm desperate and I'm sure that they will call Iranians Arab. I don't know how to contact Dice and tell them about it. They probably won't care anyway, because there are no legal End-users for their game in Iran (there's lots of illegal users though). "
I totally agree with you, they will misrepresent Persians and if they do, I am never buying another DICE game ever again. Also, they shouldn't put the entire country, not even one or two cities.
#34 Posted by tekmojo (2299 posts) -
@Underachiever007 said:
" Guys, please stop talking about this game now. It's getting me excited. "
#35 Posted by RsistncE (4496 posts) -
@jakob187 said:
" @RsistncE said:
" I'd rather them focus completely on the multiplayer and just skip the single player entirely. It's not exactly what the Battlefield franchise is known for... "
It's not like they DIDN'T focus on the multiplayer for Bad Company 2.  Hell, that multiplayer was pretty excellent.  Moreover, it happened to have a pretty good single player as well.  The same can be said for its predecessor.  As long as the multiplayer is beefy and will keep my fingers on the keyboard, then I'm fine with it.  The single player would just be a bonus. "
Yeah BUT what I'm saying is that it's the multiplayer that's important to me and if cutting single player in any way improves the multiplayer then I'm all for it.
#36 Edited by Seppli (10251 posts) -
@ISuperGamerI said:

" @Seppli said:

" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "
What the heck are you talking about? Do you even know where Tehran is in the world? "
Iran. Which is likely to be invaded by the US within this decade. Take my word for it.
#37 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -
@Seppli said:
" @ISuperGamerI said:

" @Seppli said:

" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "
What the heck are you talking about? Do you even know where Tehran is in the world? "
Iran. Which is likely to be invaded by the US within this decade. Take my word for it. "
I feel sorry for how much of a redneck you are and the US will not invade Iran, that would be an abomination just waiting to happen.
#38 Posted by Seppli (10251 posts) -
@ISuperGamerI said:
" @Seppli said:
" @ISuperGamerI said:

" @Seppli said:

" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "
What the heck are you talking about? Do you even know where Tehran is in the world? "
Iran. Which is likely to be invaded by the US within this decade. Take my word for it. "
I feel sorry for how much of a redneck you are and the US will not invade Iran, that would be an abomination just waiting to happen. "
Not even American. Current regime acts pretty iffy in my opinion. Iran has WMD in the works. Just recently 2 Iranian nuclear scientist got BOMBED at the same day. That's some Sam Fischer-style CIA shit.
 
Anticipating interventention by American forces and later International forces to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Likelyness 50% to happen this decade by my own unqualifyied estimation.
#39 Posted by ISuperGamerI (1880 posts) -
@Seppli said:
" @ISuperGamerI said:
" @Seppli said:
" @ISuperGamerI said:

" @Seppli said:

" @Jayross: @ISuperGamerI:  Who cares, as long as it is pretty and blows up well?  Also, we will fight on both sides. So you are Teheran in a way. I guess more people will have problems with defending Teheran, rather than being offended by it being represented wrongly. You are gonna play as the dudes your dudes gonna attack within this decade for realz. "
What the heck are you talking about? Do you even know where Tehran is in the world? "
Iran. Which is likely to be invaded by the US within this decade. Take my word for it. "
I feel sorry for how much of a redneck you are and the US will not invade Iran, that would be an abomination just waiting to happen. "
Not even American. Current regime acts pretty iffy in my opinion. Iran has WMD in the works. Just recently 2 Iranian nuclear scientist got BOMBED at the same day. That's some Sam Fischer-style CIA shit.  Anticipating interventention by American forces and later International forces to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Likelyness 50% to happen this decade by my own unqualifyied estimation. "
Yes the current Persian regime is a disgrace, but the only way to get rid of it is to take out the government. The country that is quickly becoming a nuclear powerhouse is China.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.