Follow

    Battlefield 3

    Game » consists of 15 releases. Released Oct 25, 2011

    Battlefield 3 is DICE's third numerical installment in the Battlefield franchise. It features a single player and co-operative campaign, as well as an extensive multiplayer component.

    Do any of the console players feel supremely boned by BF3?

    • 131 results
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Avatar image for oldmanlight
    OldManLight

    1328

    Forum Posts

    177

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 7

    User Lists: 9

    #1  Edited By OldManLight

    I'm not looking to suppress any opinions but more rather wanting to have a legitmate discussion about marketing tactics like a "bait and switch" and on the process of manipulating review outlets.

    My observations so far:

    1. The version on the consoles is inferior in most respects to the pc version. i'm not trolling here. The pc version has a better visuals and holds more true to the true nature of battlefield games.
    2. The marketing tactics of this game are blatantly designed to trick us. They show you the game running on a super charged pc and then lead you to believe the console is capable of replicating that. Mind you the console tries and does a decent job, but it's still a shitty practice.
    3. Finally, WTF is with only certain review outlets getting the game prior to release and nobody seemingly getting a console copy until release eve/day. For the company having the attitude that the game is superior to other similar products, that doesn't seem like confidence, it seems like you're trying to manipulate review scores that aid consumers in making a decision to buy by taking away what would be available info.

    From what i've seen of the console version, it looks ok but with other big games waiting in the wings, i don't feel compelled yet to devote my money to.

    Avatar image for ahmadmetallic
    AhmadMetallic

    19300

    Forum Posts

    -1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 11

    #2  Edited By AhmadMetallic

    The version on the consoles is inferior in most respects to the pc version. i'm not trolling here. The pc version has a better visuals and holds more true to the true nature of battlefield games.

    If it's any consolation, the game is far from true to either the Battlefield franchise, Battlefield 2 specifically, or any decent competitive multiplayer PC game for that matter. The level design and gameplay are 100% tailored for consoles. The lack of standard age-old PC features is outrageous.  
    So neither you nor I are satisfied by this product, my friend. 

    The marketing tactics of this game are blatantly designed to trick us. They show you the game running on a super charged pc and then lead you to believe the console is capable of replicating that. Mind you the console tries and does a decent job, but it's still a shitty practice.

    Edit: No they were clear that they were showing the game on PC. 
    However, they tricked us into thinking that BF3 is a sequel to BF2
     

    Finally, WTF is with only certain review outlets getting the game prior to release and nobody seemingly getting a console copy until release eve/day. For the company having the attitude that the game is superior to other similar products, that doesn't seem like confidence, it seems like you're trying to manipulate review scores that aid consumers in making a decision to buy by taking away what would be available info.

    They not only spent enormous sums of money on this game, but they're trying to take down Modern Warfare. I'm not surprised by their review bullshit.
    Avatar image for wuddel
    Wuddel

    2436

    Forum Posts

    1448

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #3  Edited By Wuddel

    No. Because anyone with common sense and some "life experience", who also followed this site for a while, should know that. Companies will always try to fuck you over. PCs are more powerful/flexible, which is reflected in games. Simple as that.

    Avatar image for centurioncajun
    CenturionCajun

    1573

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 8

    User Lists: 1

    #4  Edited By CenturionCajun

    1. While none of the consoles can compare to a cutting edge PC from what I've played of the game on 360 so far the visuals are pleasing. It doesn't look like a real time cinematic or anything but it's crisp and runs well. Keep in mind this is with the optional high res pack installed.

    2. I don't see it as any different than any other product they are trying to sell you. As long as you read the disclaimer that its a cinematic or running on a PC it's all good.

    3. They sent out PC review builds in advance but held onto the console ones till yesterday because of a sizeable day 1 patch they put out. It supposedly fixed alot of issues encountered in the beta. So far after downloading it I've encountered no issues so I see it as a viable, if regretable, action.

    Avatar image for gs_dan
    GS_Dan

    1438

    Forum Posts

    68

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 15

    User Lists: 1

    #5  Edited By GS_Dan

    Adverts have always shown the best looking versions of games. The worst example I can remember was an advert for Tiger Woods, where someone was using a Wii remote with 360 footage or something.

    Avatar image for tennmuerti
    Tennmuerti

    9465

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 7

    #6  Edited By Tennmuerti
    @OldManLight
    1. Well yeah no shit. Did someone excpect otherwise? The graphics part is true for every multiplatform game release these days. And they told people about differences in playercounts and servers beforehand
    2. I'm pretty sure they mentioned specifically when they were showing videos of the 360 version of the game. They never mislabeled any of them. And every game that has a multiplatform release will show trailers based on the PC version without mentioning it by default.
    Avatar image for oldmanlight
    OldManLight

    1328

    Forum Posts

    177

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 7

    User Lists: 9

    #7  Edited By OldManLight

    @CenturionCajun: That whole texture pack thing bugs the hell out of me. Don't get me wrong, it's great they included it but what a bad precedent to set. I had a buddy of mine talking to me about it last night and he said "it's nice they split up the singleplayer and multiplayer on separate discs. My response was, "how is that nice?". It's clear in cases like this and other games like Dead Space 2 and LA Noire that the DVD9 format is really on the ropes as being consumer friendly. not interested in installing textures on my hard drive just to have the visuals get to their "intended quality".

    Avatar image for andorski
    Andorski

    5482

    Forum Posts

    2310

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 3

    #8  Edited By Andorski

    Your complains are all founded on the fact that DICE chose to focus on the PC version first and foremost. Not sure why you would except the game to run graphically equivalent between the PC and console; the 360 is six year old hardware while BF3 is designed to take advantage of today's PC hardware - of course it's going to look way better on PC.

    Avatar image for mfpantst
    mfpantst

    2660

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 4

    User Lists: 0

    #9  Edited By mfpantst

    So I uhh think you might have missed the part where they said "we're going to lead on the PC and make it so you have to have a nice PC to run it best."  and the follow up to that was "oh and we'll put it on consoles, but we're leading on PC."  For all the people who said to you 'companies will fuck you over' sure they will, but in this case what you have is a failure to listen to what people said.  What they said is that the PC version will look best and they'll do their best to get it on consoles.
    As far as the review thing, EA is just worried about a DICE property.  They shouldn't and don't need to, but they were.

    Avatar image for oldmanlight
    OldManLight

    1328

    Forum Posts

    177

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 7

    User Lists: 9

    #10  Edited By OldManLight

    @Tennmuerti said:

    @OldManLight:
    1. Well yeah no shit. Did someone excpect otherwise? The graphics part is true for every multiplatform game release these days. And they told people about differences in playercounts and servers beforehand
    2. I'm pretty sure they mentioned specifically when they were showing videos of the 360 version of the game. They never mislabeled any of them. And every game that has a multiplatform release will show trailers based on the PC version without mentioning it by default.

    i'm not trying to imply that i was dooped or that the majority of people that read the site would have been. But the casual consumer that gravitates toward the eye catching thing on tv, the ones with more money than sense are the ones i'm worried for. These tactics are designed to trick those who don't pay attention and to me, that's shitty any way you slice it.

    Avatar image for tennmuerti
    Tennmuerti

    9465

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 7

    #11  Edited By Tennmuerti
    @OldManLight said:

    @Tennmuerti said:

    @OldManLight:
    1. Well yeah no shit. Did someone excpect otherwise? The graphics part is true for every multiplatform game release these days. And they told people about differences in playercounts and servers beforehand
    2. I'm pretty sure they mentioned specifically when they were showing videos of the 360 version of the game. They never mislabeled any of them. And every game that has a multiplatform release will show trailers based on the PC version without mentioning it by default.

    i'm not trying to imply that i was dooped or that the majority of people that read the site would have been. But the casual consumer that gravitates toward the eye catching thing on tv, the ones with more money than sense are the ones i'm worried for. These tactics are designed to trick those who don't pay attention and to me, that's shitty any way you slice it.

    Again this is true for every multiplatform (ps3/360/pc) release for the past 2-3 years.
    Avatar image for jetsetwillie
    jetsetwillie

    882

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #12  Edited By jetsetwillie

    any one buying the console version expecting it too look and play like the PC version on their again console hardware is a moron.

    like someone complaining there vauxhaul astra is not as good as a mercades SLS

    and adverts used to use pre-rendered CGI to promote games.

    Avatar image for centurioncajun
    CenturionCajun

    1573

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 8

    User Lists: 1

    #13  Edited By CenturionCajun
    @OldManLight Agreed, DVD is showing its age. Microsoft didn't back HD DVD in the way they should (ie put it in the 360) and thus lost the format war. Since then they have been saddled with ever growing numbers of discs to hold modern games. It's just something we're going to have to live with till the next round of systems show up.
    Avatar image for wuddel
    Wuddel

    2436

    Forum Posts

    1448

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #14  Edited By Wuddel

    @OldManLight said:

    But the casual consumer that gravitates toward the eye catching thing on tv, the ones with more money than sense are the ones i'm worried for. These tactics are designed to trick those who don't pay attention and to me, that's shitty any way you slice it.

    I am not even sure if this consumer still exists. Also nobody actually expects that AXE body spray will get you women. "Stupid" people deserve to be fucked over. Thats how capitalism works.

    Avatar image for arker101
    Arker101

    1484

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #15  Edited By Arker101

    What are the reasons that say PC is superior? Graphics and player count, right? That's not enough to make me want to get a high end PC for this game. Having a couple more people to shoot at/be shot by would be alright, but it's not imperative to the experience, at least for me.

    Avatar image for yanngc33
    Yanngc33

    4551

    Forum Posts

    87219

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 14

    User Lists: 5

    #16  Edited By Yanngc33

    @GS_Dan said:

    Adverts have always shown the best looking versions of games. The worst example I can remember was an advert for Tiger Woods, where someone was using a Wii remote with 360 footage or something.

    Agreed, this has been happening for a while

    Avatar image for oldmanlight
    OldManLight

    1328

    Forum Posts

    177

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 7

    User Lists: 9

    #17  Edited By OldManLight

    @jetsetwillie said:

    any one buying the console version expecting it too look and play like the PC version on their again console hardware is a moron.

    like someone complaining there vauxhaul astra is not as good as a mercades SLS

    and adverts used to use pre-rendered CGI to promote games.

    that's being a bit harsh. I know a lot of great people who play games, love to play good ones, but don't have the time or patience to devote to building/mainting their own gaming pc or the time to devote to consuming game enthusiast press material where this stuff is made apparent. Doesn't make them stupid, just means they have different priorities. My point is, i'd love it if all my friends could play whatever game that comes out on whatever system they wanted and have the same experience as me. The way this game was done was designed to trick people like them.

    Avatar image for kaedeno
    kaedeno

    10

    Forum Posts

    31

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #18  Edited By kaedeno

    @Arker101 said:

    What are the reasons that say PC is superior? Graphics and player count, right? That's not enough to make me want to get a high end PC for this game. Having a couple more people to shoot at/be shot by would be alright, but it's not imperative to the experience, at least for me.

    The difference between 24 and 64 players seems to be pretty noticeable from what I've heard.

    Avatar image for maddprodigy
    MaddProdigy

    1074

    Forum Posts

    178

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 0

    #19  Edited By MaddProdigy

    If you're stupid, yes, you will feel "boned".

    It sounds like you've worked out the bullshit marketing tactics for yourself (releasing footage running on the best PC hardware out there, etc.) so WHAT ARE YOU ASKING? Are you really shocked that a company tries to sell it's product to the most people possible? Wants it shown in the absolute best light, and shown to the most people? This is basic marketing. You should not be disappointed with them, but with yourself, for believing any of it.

    In an age of consumerism, if you fall for the marketers bullshit so easily just buy yourself some lube now and save time.

    @Wuddel said:

    @OldManLight said:

    But the casual consumer that gravitates toward the eye catching thing on tv, the ones with more money than sense are the ones i'm worried for. These tactics are designed to trick those who don't pay attention and to me, that's shitty any way you slice it.

    I am not even sure if this consumer still exists. Also nobody actually expects that AXE body spray will get you women. "Stupid" people deserve to be fucked over. Thats how capitalism works.

    Not sure if they exist? You are posting in a thread created by a dude who completely fell for the BF3 marketing. There are 5+ other consumers on here actually agreeing with him. Ludicrous, yes, but what do you mean not sure if they exist haha

    Avatar image for deathmachine117
    Deathmachine117

    383

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #20  Edited By Deathmachine117

    I am going to be buying it for the 360 and dont feel boned at all, while I would like to have a PC that could run it thats not going to happen for a while. So I will take the console version which even though it hasnt got the same graphics (Still pretty good for a console) and a lower player count as long as the game lets me shoot dudes online I will feel I get my moneys worth.

    Avatar image for arker101
    Arker101

    1484

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #21  Edited By Arker101

    @kaedeno said:

    @Arker101 said:

    What are the reasons that say PC is superior? Graphics and player count, right? That's not enough to make me want to get a high end PC for this game. Having a couple more people to shoot at/be shot by would be alright, but it's not imperative to the experience, at least for me.

    The difference between 24 and 64 players seems to be pretty noticeable from what I've heard.

    Yeah it's more then double the size of the console cap, but from what I've seen the maps aren't double the size, nor with double the vehicles. That leads me to believe that the PC version just has more guys shooting at you. If I was in a Clan or something, that would be terrific, but I usually play with 5-7 friends on any given weekend. The only difference is you have a lot more infantry vs infantry combat which isn't as appealing as vehicle combat. I guess more players just doesn't excite me.

    Avatar image for gs_dan
    GS_Dan

    1438

    Forum Posts

    68

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 15

    User Lists: 1

    #22  Edited By GS_Dan

    @Arker101: When the larger maps are designed for 64 players then the console versions will suffer. Barren map < populated map.

    Avatar image for viciousreiven
    ViciousReiven

    983

    Forum Posts

    46

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #23  Edited By ViciousReiven

    @Deathmachine117 said:

    I am going to be buying it for the 360 and dont feel boned at all, while I would like to have a PC that could run it thats not going to happen for a while. So I will take the console version which even though it hasnt got the same graphics (Still pretty good for a console) and a lower player count as long as the game lets me shoot dudes online I will feel I get my moneys worth.

    This is pretty much how I feel, yes I would love to be a PC gamer but I don't have the money to afford one, therefore I will settle with what I can get, as long as it's still fun.

    Avatar image for oldmanlight
    OldManLight

    1328

    Forum Posts

    177

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 7

    User Lists: 9

    #24  Edited By OldManLight

    @MaddProdigy said:

    If you're stupid, yes, you will feel "boned"@Wuddel said:

    @OldManLight said:

    But the casual consumer that gravitates toward the eye catching thing on tv, the ones with more money than sense are the ones i'm worried for. These tactics are designed to trick those who don't pay attention and to me, that's shitty any way you slice it.

    I am not even sure if this consumer still exists. Also nobody actually expects that AXE body spray will get you women. "Stupid" people deserve to be fucked over. Thats how capitalism works.

    Not sure if they exist? You are posting in a thread created by a dude who completely fell for the BF3 marketing. There are 5+ other consumers on here actually agreeing with him. Ludicrous, yes, but what do you mean not sure if they exist haha

    to clarify, i put the brakes on my buying decision on this game after being unimpressed by both the pc and 360 versions of the beta. I'm mainly advocating for my friends. The people who don't know what a Giant Bomb or a Kotaku are. :) On some level you have to see me point of view don't you. Say you have a friend that knows you like games and asks you what you're playing and then goes out on their own to pick up that game based on your endorsement. Don't you kinda feel a little bad for them if they end up with a bad version of the game because all the marketing material out there looks like it was representative of something way better?

    Avatar image for jetsetwillie
    jetsetwillie

    882

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #25  Edited By jetsetwillie

    @OldManLight said:

    @jetsetwillie said:

    any one buying the console version expecting it too look and play like the PC version on their again console hardware is a moron.

    like someone complaining there vauxhaul astra is not as good as a mercades SLS

    and adverts used to use pre-rendered CGI to promote games.

    that's being a bit harsh. I know a lot of great people who play games, love to play good ones, but don't have the time or patience to devote to building/mainting their own gaming pc or the time to devote to consuming game enthusiast press material where this stuff is made apparent. Doesn't make them stupid, just means they have different priorities. My point is, i'd love it if all my friends could play whatever game that comes out on whatever system they wanted and have the same experience as me. The way this game was done was designed to trick people like them.

    im not saying they are morons because they don't have a PC.

    im saying they would be morons if they bought BF3 for a console and EXPECTED it to look and play like a PC and then went on to feel supremely boned about it.

    Avatar image for arker101
    Arker101

    1484

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #26  Edited By Arker101

    @GS_Dan: I could understand that if all the maps were like Caspian Border, but when you have Operation Metro (which I believe has two maps like it) and the map that Jeff played in the QL, those maps do not look designed to have that many players without it being -excuse my french- a clusterfuck. I don't know some people may enjoy having tons of dudes shooting at them, but if the QL was any indication, there will be plenty of dudes shooting you as you spawn.

    Avatar image for inktoid
    InKtOiD

    111

    Forum Posts

    65

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 6

    User Lists: 4

    #27  Edited By InKtOiD

    @OldManLight: I'm pretty sure they placed them on separate discs not because of a lack of space but because they thought it was a simpler way to manage it.

    While you could argue I am wrong neither of us have any proof as to why they put them on two separate discs so that conversation has no point in even happening.

    Avatar image for twisted_scot
    Twisted_Scot

    1213

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 1

    #28  Edited By Twisted_Scot

    I'll pick it up for Xbox, use it as the Bad Compnay 3 that it is then wait for the modding comunity to kick into high gear, save some cash for a new PC and then hopefully a year from now be able to play a true BF3 game. This seems to be pretty much shaping up the way I had a suspicion that it would. ah well.

    Avatar image for knetic2341
    knetic2341

    255

    Forum Posts

    131

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    #29  Edited By knetic2341

    Nope.

    Avatar image for karl_boss
    Karl_Boss

    8020

    Forum Posts

    132084

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    #30  Edited By Karl_Boss

    I couldn't care less about the graphics.

    Avatar image for swoxx
    Swoxx

    3049

    Forum Posts

    468

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #31  Edited By Swoxx

    As a fan of the BF franchise since 1942, I'm satisfied. That's all I'm going to say on the subject.

    Avatar image for mosdl
    mosdl

    3422

    Forum Posts

    2951

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 3

    User Lists: 5

    #32  Edited By mosdl

    @Arker101 said:

    @GS_Dan: I could understand that if all the maps were like Caspian Border, but when you have Operation Metro (which I believe has two maps like it) and the map that Jeff played in the QL, those maps do not look designed to have that many players without it being -excuse my french- a clusterfuck. I don't know some people may enjoy having tons of dudes shooting at them, but if the QL was any indication, there will be plenty of dudes shooting you as you spawn.

    That is my experience in COD games - spawn, get shot.

    Avatar image for sooty
    Sooty

    8193

    Forum Posts

    306

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 3

    #33  Edited By Sooty

    @AhmadMetallic said:

    The version on the consoles is inferior in most respects to the pc version. i'm not trolling here. The pc version has a better visuals and holds more true to the true nature of battlefield games.

    The level design and gameplay are 100% tailored for consoles.

    You really are full of shit sometimes.

    Your whole BF2 elitist thing has been running thin for a long time, the rose tinted glasses have to come off. Caspian Border could have easily been a Battlefield 2 map. (and yes I played BF2 when it came out, and for a long time after release)

    But whatever, not bothering.

    Avatar image for jimi
    jimi

    1148

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 12

    #34  Edited By jimi

    I'm not sure why they would. Everything the console players seem to be complaining about was obvious before the game's release. If anything I would say the PC players got boned by the game being developed for consoles.

    Avatar image for imsh_pl
    imsh_pl

    4208

    Forum Posts

    51

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 4

    #35  Edited By imsh_pl
    @OldManLight said
    1. The version on the consoles is inferior in most respects to the pc version. i'm not trolling here. The pc version has a better visuals and holds more true to the true nature of battlefield games.

    Yeah... how is the fact that the game looks better on the PC surprising again?

    1. The marketing tactics of this game are blatantly designed to trick us. They show you the game running on a super charged pc and then lead you to believe the console is capable of replicating that. Mind you the console tries and does a decent job, but it's still a shitty practice.

    Well no shit, if I were to advertise a game I sure as hell wouldn't show the version that looks worse...

    1. Finally, WTF is with only certain review outlets getting the game prior to release and nobody seemingly getting a console copy until release eve/day. For the company having the attitude that the game is superior to other similar products, that doesn't seem like confidence, it seems like you're trying to manipulate review scores that aid consumers in making a decision to buy by taking away what would be available info.

    Again, not really that sursprising. They want to be able to put a good review on the box and have a high metacritic average upon launch.

     
    Also fuck that editor, can't remove the goddamn numbers.

    Avatar image for ahmadmetallic
    AhmadMetallic

    19300

    Forum Posts

    -1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 11

    #36  Edited By AhmadMetallic
    @Sooty said:

    Your whole BF2 elitist thing has been running thin for a long time, the rose tinted glasses have to come off. 

    Uh huh, same old pointless "elitism! so much whining!" argument that avoids discussing gameplay and focuses on how the other person approaches the topics. 

     

    Caspian Border could have easily been a Battlefield 2 map. (and yes I played BF2 when it came out, and for a long time after release)

    Name one Battlefield 2 map that had five flags, all located in the center of the map so close that you can run from one to another in less than 15 seconds and not utilize transport vehicles to "conquer" them in "conquest" mode (not to mention having those control points being captured once every 2 minutes), with out-of-bounds safe enemy bases, and vehicles that die after taking 60% damage.  
    Name one Battlefield 2 round you played where you couldn't spectate your team or use a freecam, couldn't use a Joystick to fly your jet, couldn't have multiple sets of control schemes for the different vehicles, couldn't create more than one soldier name (for a visitng friend or a brother), couldn't record the round using the in-engine Battlerecorder, couldn't see your ping, didn't feel any form of hierarchy on the battlefield, couldn't use loud-and-clear pre-recorded voice commands to quickly request things and thank your teammates, had super accurate guns with integrated auto-center, or showed up on the minimap of the enemy whenever you fired your gun. 
     
    Didn't think so.
    Avatar image for hoossy
    hoossy

    1075

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #37  Edited By hoossy

    @OldManLight:

    and why is this any surprise to you? Besides some glitching and a few bugs. BF3 is still an extremely good looking game on the consoles (well, 360 anyways). I think DICE has been pretty upfront about PC being lead, and as someone who will also be console version, I have no problem with that.

    As for the delayed console reviews, have you been under a rock? This has been explained everywhere. I admit, it's still annoying of EA to release it in such a manner. Clearly not the smooth delivery that I'm sure they wanted. But oh well... Doesn't stop me from buying it!

    Avatar image for huntad
    huntad

    2432

    Forum Posts

    4409

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 5

    User Lists: 13

    #38  Edited By huntad

    @hoossy said:

    @OldManLight:

    and why is this any surprise to you? Besides some glitching and a few bugs. BF3 is still an extremely good looking game on the consoles (well, 360 anyways). I think DICE has been pretty upfront about PC being lead, and as someone who will also be console version, I have no problem with that.

    As for the delayed console reviews, have you been under a rock? This has been explained everywhere. I admit, it's still annoying of EA to release it in such a manner. Clearly not the smooth delivery that I'm sure they wanted. But oh well... Doesn't stop me from buying it!

    Well it definitely stopped me from buying it. As someone, like you, who is knowledgeable about games, I know that a delay in anything is always for a reason. After seeing gameplay, I just don't know. The maps look really big and open for 24 players to fill. It really seems like having 64 players is the ideal and preferred way to play, which is fine, but that making the maps smaller wasn't really enough. A game like Bad Company 2 seemed to work extremely well, because it was seemingly designed for the consoles and felt perfect for the player count.

    Avatar image for deactivated-5abeb9715d7a2
    deactivated-5abeb9715d7a2

    372

    Forum Posts

    345

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 22

    Personally, I would be surprised if a console ever beat out a PC in the area of graphics, given that they've had more than half a decade to improve and are several generations graphics cards ahead.  I'd be nearly as surprised if they didn't want to show off their best looking version.
     
    Whether it's good or not, I've had my fill, and am just not interested in the series anymore.

    Avatar image for deranged_midget
    Deranged

    2022

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 10

    User Lists: 5

    #40  Edited By Deranged

    I'm most disappointed in the lack of a bigger player count in multiplayer. 24 players? Are you fucking kidding me? PC version has more players on ONE TEAM than we do in the whole match...

    Fucking ridiculous. Graphics are definitely a massive step up from the beta though.

    Avatar image for privateirontfu
    PrivateIronTFU

    3858

    Forum Posts

    2

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 3

    #41  Edited By PrivateIronTFU

    You mean a six year old console can't make this look as pretty as a brand new PC? Get outta town!

    Ugh.

    Avatar image for mosdl
    mosdl

    3422

    Forum Posts

    2951

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 3

    User Lists: 5

    #42  Edited By mosdl

    @mcderby4 said:

    I'm most disappointed in the lack of a bigger player count in multiplayer. 24 players? Are you fucking kidding me? PC version has more players on ONE TEAM than we do in the whole match...

    Fucking ridiculous. Graphics are definitely a massive step up from the beta though.

    Consoles limit the bandwidth I believe games have access to, which is why 24 players.

    Avatar image for harkat
    Harkat

    1171

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #43  Edited By Harkat

    I'm looking forward to playing it on 360 when it comes out in Europe on friday. That said, I'm a bit concerned about some stuff.

    I don't like that team-benefitting items are pretty optional. One of the great things about BC2 was how you could not opt out of using a defibrillator and health kits. Every class had a specific support role alongside his "shoot dudes" role. Now, you can make the assault guy just a "shoot dudes" guy.

    Avatar image for hoossy
    hoossy

    1075

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #44  Edited By hoossy

    @huntad said:

    @hoossy said:

    @OldManLight:

    and why is this any surprise to you? Besides some glitching and a few bugs. BF3 is still an extremely good looking game on the consoles (well, 360 anyways). I think DICE has been pretty upfront about PC being lead, and as someone who will also be console version, I have no problem with that.

    As for the delayed console reviews, have you been under a rock? This has been explained everywhere. I admit, it's still annoying of EA to release it in such a manner. Clearly not the smooth delivery that I'm sure they wanted. But oh well... Doesn't stop me from buying it!

    Well it definitely stopped me from buying it. As someone, like you, who is knowledgeable about games, I know that a delay in anything is always for a reason. After seeing gameplay, I just don't know. The maps look really big and open for 24 players to fill. It really seems like having 64 players is the ideal and preferred way to play, which is fine, but that making the maps smaller wasn't really enough. A game like Bad Company 2 seemed to work extremely well, because it was seemingly designed for the consoles and felt perfect for the player count.

    I see where you are coming from. I'll be interested to see the console reviews on how DICE managed the map sizes/balancing on a 24 person scale. If they tackle it like BC2, then I think we are in luck... but of course as you pointed out, that was a console centric game.

    Seeing as this series has been my go to source for online gaming, I know I'll be placing my money down for a copy very soon. I would have gone last night... but I just have too much school work....

    Avatar image for deactivated-5eca34e37141a
    deactivated-5eca34e37141a

    218

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    People that feel 'boned' are extremely naive and have clearly never played any other BF game on consoles.

    I have played hundreds of hours of 1943 & bad company series on X360; from what I've seen of BF3 it looks very similar in scale and quality.

    Avatar image for arker101
    Arker101

    1484

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #46  Edited By Arker101

    @mosdl: I meant as in he spawned and there was no way of fighting back because he spawned in front of dudes, and it seems like that problem would be amplified with more players. I'll admit that he may have just had bad luck, but eh.

    Avatar image for sputty
    Sputty

    152

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #47  Edited By Sputty

    Your complaints are invalid. Comparing it to the PC version doesn't work, if a game isn't graphically superior on a PC then the developers have failed in some serious way. Compare it to other games on your platform. Are there games with better graphics on the Xbox or PS3? Probably not, and even then it would probably be a stylistic preference as opposed to a technological one.

    The game offers larger maps, better visuals and larger scale combat than most games on the XBox 360 and PS3, if your complaints are that the PC is better then get a PC and play it on full scale there.

    Would you prefer it if they artificially limited the graphic quality of the PC and forced the player count to 24 to please you while not actually giving you any benefit?

    Avatar image for arker101
    Arker101

    1484

    Forum Posts

    1

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 1

    #48  Edited By Arker101

    @GS_Dan:

    I found this quote from Droop, and it sums up my feelings as well.

    "I also find the map design sorta wierd. I've not really been enjoying playing 64 players on a lot of the maps. Especially not Metro, that was a such a clusterfuck of explosion spam."

    I would rather have packets of conflict instead of constantly getting killed.

    Avatar image for super_yosh_64
    Super_Yosh_64

    135

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 0

    #49  Edited By Super_Yosh_64

    i bought it on 360 and it looks kinda weird but i like it

    Avatar image for spencertucksen
    SpencerTucksen

    444

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 0

    #50  Edited By SpencerTucksen

    @Wuddel said:

    @OldManLight said:

    But the casual consumer that gravitates toward the eye catching thing on tv, the ones with more money than sense are the ones i'm worried for. These tactics are designed to trick those who don't pay attention and to me, that's shitty any way you slice it.

    I am not even sure if this consumer still exists. Also nobody actually expects that AXE body spray will get you women. "Stupid" people deserve to be fucked over. Thats how capitalism works.

    I SO agree with this statement. People must pay for their ignorance, both literally and figuratively, to learn their lesson.

    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.