Battlefield 3 to be revealed

Spear

The tank and jets glimpse is the same stuff from the leaked GDC conference. Does this mean the 17th still brings a newer trailer?

Spear

If you're really bored, here's the high res, 60 fps form of the video

http://static.cdn.ea.com/eagl_online/u/f/bf3/noise/vids/Battlefield_3_Fault_Line_Full_Trailer.zip

Be warned it's 1.8gig.

Should have said that that's the 12 minute edition

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zw8SmsovJc

shootermacg

Hope the old gal is up to the minimum specs.

BlastedGlute

Yeah I'd love to think I could run it comfortably with what I have but some components are going to need replacing. I have a gain ward phantom 570gtx right now that should stand up to it pretty well but might swap out my CPU before launch. I was a huge BF2 fan back in the day. Very versatile gameplay I really hope this is a true bf2 sequel and not bad company....

Jim

Bit disappointed with the trailer since it's just all the other trailers put together. I'd rather see more of the 1 second random glimpses at the end of trailer. That city at night looks amazing.

Spear

Multiplayer reveal is at E3 from June 7th to 9th.

dreamers75

tv ads on ITV during the fa cup games

Bit early, no?

Spear

dreamers75 wrote: »

tv ads on ITV during the fa cup games

Bit early, no?

They've got an ad budget in the region of $100 million, same as Activision plan for MW3, so they're making sure they're seen early and often and widely.

Dcully

When is this due guys, cant frigging wait and hope its a true successor to BF2.

the_syco

Dcully wrote: »

When is this due guys, cant frigging wait and hope its a true successor to BF2.

Fall 2011, so September-November-ish.

BlastedGlute

Plenty of time to upgrade your machines ;D

Stingerbar

Playing Vietnam to death, maps starting to feel too small, only 32 players, I need more

Anything bigger out there that can tide me over till bf3 is out?
Is there anything with 128 players?

Kiith

MAG on the PS3 is the closest you'll get to 128 players.

hightower1

So the only online shooters I've really dabbled in are MW2, bad company 2 and MOH. How how different is the battlefield experience from these? Still a bit perpexed by the idea of jets on a game like this?

Never really used vehicals in bad company , tbh I wanted to play a FPS not a vehical shooter so just didnt bother that much but did enjoy the dynamic of the vehicals being there and used by others.

In terms of MW2, bad company 2 and MOH which would battlefield resemble? I feel MW2 was highly addictive but very arcade like, bad company 2 was probably the one I played the least -just felt the skill curve was way too high to get me hooked and MOH was excellent if the proper time was put into it (but then it was sorely lacking on range of maps and weapons).

Just really wanna know what to expect in terms of gameplay and match dynamics. Is it addictive? Fast paced or slow burner? Full of cheap kills or skill shots? Does the dynamic mean match wins are in favour of team play or one uber player?

the_syco

hightower1 wrote: »

Just really wanna know what to expect in terms of gameplay and match dynamics. Is it addictive? Fast paced or slow burner? Full of cheap kills or skill shots? Does the dynamic mean match wins are in favour of team play or one uber player?

Imagine "Atacama Desert" from Bad Company 2, but with the bases 30 seconds away from each other, if travelling by a jeep.

Now imagine that there is only one way in to "B". You'd think that all you'd have to do would be have a tank and 3 people to protect it? Well, if a plane could take out the tank, and a chopper could let 5 people pop in the back in "B", whilst your team takes "C", and "A" is a stalemate, it could be fast and fun.

Or it could suck with 16 snipers on "C". And yes, snipers can take down planes ^.^ But would go squish when a tank runs over them

Blazer

hightower1 wrote: »

Just really wanna know what to expect in terms of gameplay and match dynamics. Is it addictive? Fast paced or slow burner? Full of cheap kills or skill shots? Does the dynamic mean match wins are in favour of team play or one uber player?

You could have the best player in the world on your team and still lose.
A good squad will easily over-run the enemy if they use the right tactics etc.
That was the beauty of Battlefield...it wasn't about the players but how the squads played to their advantages.
At all times you stick with your squad...it's not like BC2 where you can wander aimlessly about in the map willy nilly..

hightower1

Thanks for the info guys, sounds very much like MOH with larger maps.
I love that game simply because the emphasis is on team based play, you can try rambo it but its not going to do very much. Felt very much like a game of rugby tbh, small movements but involving the entire team to work in tandem to keep momentum up as opposed to COD which team work is well..... non existent.

Spear

hightower1 wrote: »

Thanks for the info guys, sounds very much like MOH with larger maps.
I love that game simply because the emphasis is on team based play, you can try rambo it but its not going to do very much. Felt very much like a game of rugby tbh, small movements but involving the entire team to work in tandem to keep momentum up as opposed to COD which team work is well..... non existent.

I think MoH is a bad analogy here. There used to be a promotional video from BF2's launch which explained it's underlying rock/paper/scissors, whereby everything was weak to something but powerful against something else. Damned if I can find the video now that it's useful. The token vehicles in MoH don't give any indication of this, plus the small bottlenecked maps are the antithesis of the Battlefield franchise.

Spear

Spear wrote: »

I think MoH is a bad analogy here. There used to be a promotional video from BF2's launch which explained it's underlying rock/paper/scissors, whereby everything was weak to something but powerful against something else. Damned if I can find the video now that it's useful. The token vehicles in MoH don't give any indication of this, plus the small bottlenecked maps are the antithesis of the Battlefield franchise.

I had one game of MoH and hated it.
You were forced down tiny little corridors where you'd be 1 shot snipped straight away.
Don't even remember having one proper fire-fight in the round I had.

hightower1

Spear wrote: »

plus the small bottlenecked maps are the antithesis of the Battlefield franchise.

lol you have to bear in mind I was playing MOH as a break from COD which I played for a year straight as my FIRST online fps of any serious time.... coming from that MOH maps felt massive! :eek:

Really looking forward to battlefield if only for the change of pace, still waiting to see the console version running though....

Dublin_Gunner

hightower1 wrote: »

lol you have to bear in mind I was playing MOH as a break from COD which I played for a year straight as my FIRST online fps of any serious time.... coming from that MOH maps felt massive! :eek:

Really looking forward to battlefield if only for the change of pace, still waiting to see the console version running though....

The console version might look ok, but won't have a patch on the PC version, in terms of graphics, or gameplay.

You should get yourself BF2, its only a few Euro with all the add-ons these days. Should give you an idea of the scale and type of battles (though it seems fairly dated these days).

BF2142 might be better to get an idea - as at least there's still a decent community playing, and its not entirely full of hackers.

shootermacg

Squad size anyone?

Spear

shootermacg wrote: »

Squad size anyone?

Nothing said yet, they're still very tight lipped on anything related to the command structure.

Spear

http://www.xboxer360.com/news/exclusive-qa-with-patrick-bach-battlefield-3/

Confirms a demo before release. Not much else though.

Jim

I reckon squad size could be something that wont be concrete till very close to release time.

kk887

Jim wrote: »

I reckon squad size could be something that wont be concrete till very close to release time.

I would say same as BC2 as you can see in the trailer they mostly have 4 people on the field...

Jim

kk887 wrote: »

I would say same as BC2 as you can see in the trailer they mostly have 4 people on the field...

That's single player and just the AI that follows you around. BC2 is also a smaller scaled game both in map size and player count so you never know. I kinda hope they go back to the BF2 system of you can only spawn on the squad leader.

finipops

I pre ordered battlefield 3 limited edition yesterday. I can't wait for the release because these battlefield games live up to their names.

Spear

http://www.thatvideogameblog.com/2011/05/04/battlefield-3-pre-orders-up-massively-over-bfbc2/

EA's fiscal report states that BF3's pre-orders are already 700% higher than BC2's and that BC2 sold 7 million copies.

Raze_them_all

I just stumbled in on release day and picked up bc2 by pure chance as I was looking for a new game. already pre ordered 3 though