Battlefield 3

[Krynn72]

If you guys want to assume this looks like shit because events in a game with a narrative are scripted to occur at specific times, I don't know what to say.

"I bow to your wisdom, Masters. However, I would still like a hearty helping of turdsauce."

That should cover it.

 

[knut]

no, what we're saying that if the narrative is going to be driven by such cinematics we've already seen, then it's really not going to be a strong, interesting narrative at all. it's the COD strategy of winning people over by soldiers looking cool and explosions being woooowwww.

i'm all for scripted sequences, do you think i think that the CP's kicking in a door or raiding the apartments in half-life 2 aren't cool? i like them a lot, they work incredibly well, but there's interesting variation in that, creativity in the design of the soldiers, civilians, building and the reason for why they are doing, the backstory. this is just beige coloured marines trapezing through beige coloured alleys kicking in beige coloured doors because ''whats what we do hoo-rar'' /big explosion

ray-man, i get what you're saying, but why should i trust EA/Dice of all people? they say they are scrapping much of the BC format to go back to the basics of BF2, and whilst the nostalgic members of the forum have fond memories of the game for the hl2.net games, the rest of the core gameplay and mechanics sucked dick, and they didn't treat or take care of the game at all in patches. it got left to rot, and then people spammed millions of grenades at that rot and now it's just this big cesspool of shitty balance and overpowered jets.

i don't trust them at all, and showing all this namby-pamby graphics bullshit with overtones of cod doesn't convince.

And in regards to not showing multiplayer, has anyone thought that it's just not done yet?

with a Q4 release? they should be long, long into getting their shit together. not finished, nay, but then neither is the singleplayer if it says pre-alpha on the video. they better show something soon.

 

[Stigmata]

"I bow to your wisdom, Masters. However, I would still like a hearty helping of turdsauce."

That should cover it.

"I'm incapable of fairly considering evidence that affects my preconceived opinion of something."

Half-Life 2 is full of scripted sequences, but there are certain things that the engine takes care of by default, like say, your movement, or the spread of enemies' weapons when they're directed to run towards you firing. DICE employees have said, on camera, that the animation technology is based on ANT and Mirror's Edge. ANT is full body simulation that allows the engine to dynamically generate appropriate animations based on the environment the characters navigate and the physical stimuli they receive. [edit] And given that this is the animation system they use for everything in the entire game, it must therefore be running 100% of the time (minus these scripted-sequence animations that may or may not exist). I don't see how you can internalise this fact, and then extrapolate that obviously it must be a scripted knockback animation. You can't even give DICE any benefit of the doubt?

 

[Viperidae]

Half-Life 2 is full of scripted sequences, but there are certain things that the engine takes care of by default, like say, your movement, or the spread of enemies' weapons when they're directed to run towards you firing.

Except Half-Life is a singleplayer franchise. Battlefield is a multiplayer one. We don't give two shits about any kind of singleplayer in the least. Show us MP, we're happy. Show us CoD demographic catering, we rage.

Think of it this way: you watch the trailer to the Alien 5, so you expect to see something resembling a preview for a sci-fi. You don't expect to see a preview for Jackass-style documentary, followed by numerous press releases from Ridley Scott detailing how he's innovated the Jackass-style documentary medium in the Alien series, while mentioning NOTHING about how the movie is actually a sci-fi. Yeah, I suck at analogies.

I think our biggest problem with this is we still haven't seen any real gameplay footage. We've seen extended cutscenes that are bookended by the player hitting RT when the bad guys appear. Oh wait, that's the entirety of a CoD game. lol

 

[Stigmata]

The whole reason we're arguing about this, aside from the claims that this is copying COD, is that people who wanted to see multiplayer first didn't get to see multiplayer first. I wanted to see multiplayer first, but they didn't do that, and you know what? I don't give one god damn **** about it. It's not a big deal. We have to wait what, two, three extra days before we learn stuff about a game we won't get to play for another six months? Big ****ing deal. Seriously. This is reaching levels of entitlement not seen since the L4D2 boycott.

 

[Viperidae]

No, the problem is that their press approach suggests that the MP is either on the backburner, is so unremarkable that they aren't showing it, or both.

 

[Stigmata]

No, it suggests that they're aware of the fact that singleplayer will not be as impressive as multiplayer, given the multiplayer-centric focus of the series. Because of this, they're showing the singleplayer first to maximise the positive impact of the footage. The vast majority of the negative impact that I've seen from the footage, either here or on reddit, is people complaining that they didn't show multiplayer first, and then making wild extrapolations about the quality of the game. Almost everything else has been pants-wetting praise for the immersiveness and gameplay potential.

 

[Viperidae]

It's not...
even...
good...
singleplayer...
footage.

Are your standards that low? Really? REALLY? Cha-ching, success DICE, you've got your audience by the balls.

WHAT gameplay potential? The potential for buildings to fall down? Didn't Red Faction have that? Seriously, all you keep telling us is that they have some new shmancy animation system that will render people falling over dead in a million new ways. WHERE is this innovative gameplay?

 

[Evo]

I think our biggest problem with this is we still haven't seen any real gameplay footage. We've seen extended cutscenes that are bookended by the player hitting RT when the bad guys appear. Oh wait, that's the entirety of a CoD game. lol

That should be player hitting left mouse button, this was a PC demo

I'm with Stiggy on this lot btw....

-edit-

It's not...
even...
good...
singleplayer...
footage.

Are your standards that low? Really? REALLY? Cha-ching, success DICE, you've got your audience by the balls.

We have only seen a snippet of what the journos have seen at GDC, read the Eurogamer, PCG and RPS links people have put in this thread to get a feel for what was shown off totally at GDC. PCG is nice and balanced.

 

[Qonfused]

Isn't game speculation fun?

 

[Ennui]

Jesus, reading this thread makes me want to give up modding/development. You guys sure are hard to please.

I think it's obvious they're leaving MP for later - save the best for last. Multiplayer is still the primary focus of the game (I read this somewhere, one of the designers said so). This is just early post-announcement hype to get the hype train chuggin' (and it's working). We'll see multiplayer footage later as they ramp up the PR closer to release in Q4.

I'm looking forward to forcing all of you naysayers to eat your shoes come release day. I have a lot of faith in DICE... they haven't really done me wrong yet. EA might be in charge of marketing but the core team is still full of 1942/BF2 devs. I don't see what makes you guys think multiplayer won't be sweet... fully destructible environments, 64 players, tons of vehicles, conquest maps that are orders of magnitude larger than the biggest BC2 maps, top-end graphics all around and even remakes of popular BF2 maps.

 

[Apocalypse89]

I won't deny that the two minutes of footage we've seen scream "Call of Battlefield: Bad Warfare 3".

At the same time, I won't use those two minutes to judge the entire singleplayer campaign(let alone the entire game including MP). Maybe what they've shown us is an early "tutorial level" of sorts which tend to be naturally linear and scripted. Maybe they're revealing the game so that they start showing off how they've matched their competitors, and later on they're going to show what's new and fresh and about it. And even if the campaign does turn out to be a COD clone, that still says nothing about the MP side of things.

So until we know more, I'm taking my usual position of cautious optimism.

 

[Stigmata]

It's not...
even...
good...
singleplayer...
footage.

Are your standards that low? Really? REALLY? Cha-ching, success DICE, you've got your audience by the balls.

WHAT gameplay potential? The potential for buildings to fall down? Didn't Red Faction have that? Seriously, all you keep telling us is that they have some new shmancy animation system that will render people falling over dead in a million new ways. WHERE is this innovative gameplay?

I can spin any other game's prerelease publicity the same way.

Half-Life 2: "What gameplay potential? The potential for you to throw a ****ing barrel at a zombie? Who cares?"
Mass Effect: "Oh boy, I get to play Dialogue Roulette with third-person combat. HOW ENTHRALLING. Next!"

Where is the innovative gameplay? Well, what would satisfy your definition of innovative? Your standards here seem to be unbelievable. Every single game that has ever been made, ever, in the history of humanity, has been created by a process of recombination. There is no such thing as a 100% original idea, let alone a 100% original game.

And Red Faction was a case of marketing vastly overstating technical capabilities. The old Frostbite engine had better destruction modelling than RF Guerrilla, and the new one's been built from the ground up. DICE have stated that entire buildings can be levelled, piece by piece, dynamically. Earthquakes are set to occur in the campaign. Mirror's Edge tech has been upgraded and integrated into the engine. Can't you just put two and two together, speculate on the positive, and not act like the developers owe you the equivalent of the Enterprise Holodeck?

 

[ray_MAN]

What would please you guys? What exactly do you want from a modern-day, military FPS?

 

[Vegeta897]

Nah I'm just trolling.

 

[DEATHMASTER]

Grah you ****ing ******s, I'm looking for today's comments and I go back 5 pages 1 at a time. I hate you all. Except the troll.

 

[morgs]

Remember when war games were so basic that the soldiers were little blocks shooting little yellow lines. People loved those games.

The games we have these days are amazing in comparison but it's never enough.

 

[Ennui]

I still play Close Combat 2 from time to time.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Haha, speculation is great.

I have to agree on the general feel of gameplay as represented by that video. I was a fan of CoD right up to MW2, with all it's ridiculous hoo-rah bullshit, but I'm past it. Medal of Honor cemented that (which, I should remind people, DICE were partially responsible for - their track record is hardly spotless). You know what would convince me to go in for a modern shooter now? Ditch the recharging health, make combat more lethal. This would change the dynamic just enough to be interesting. How would you even out the difficulty to prevent frustration? Give your squad a medic who ****ing does something beyond being that one guy with the MG.

 

[Stigmata]

Play on Hardcore mode, then.

 

[YROC]

4 player (possibly more) co-op campaign and give everyone a job, per se. Grenadier, Medic, Rifleman, Sniper etc. takemymoney.jpg

 

[Krynn72]

EDIT: Wrong thread.

****, double post also.

 

[Krynn72]

Half-Life 2: "What gameplay potential? The potential for you to throw a ****ing barrel at a zombie? Who cares?"

You recall what some if the first footage released for hl2? The Physics gameplay. If you didnt see the innovation and gameplay possibility there, then you're delusional.

And Red Faction was a case of marketing vastly overstating technical capabilities.

DICE have stated that entire buildings can be levelled, piece by piece, dynamically. Earthquakes are set to occur in the campaign.

a case of marketing vastly overstating technical capabilities.

Uh huh.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but RF Guerilla's destruction was ****ing awesome.

Play on Hardcore mode, then.

The difficulty? Not the same.

 

[Escaep]

 

[Vegeta897]

Okay? So the developers created structures in their game world that look like ones in real life? Possibly even visiting some locations and taking reference photos!? Brilliant, why has nobody ever done this?!

At least tells us where those photos are from so we can actually gain some kind of knowledge.

 

[Escaep]

Okay? So the developers created structures in their game world that look like ones in real life? Possibly even visiting some locations and taking reference photos!? Brilliant, why has nobody ever done this?!

At least tells us where those photos are from so we can actually gain some kind of knowledge.

Calm down holy shit. They're from somewhere in Paris. Was just posting some screenshots, no need to get your panties in a bunch.

 

[Stigmata]

You recall what some if the first footage released for hl2? The Physics gameplay. If you didnt see the innovation and gameplay possibility there, then you're delusional.

You're equally delusional if you think earthquakes + body simulation + destructible buildings = WORST CALL OF DUTY EVER

Uh huh.

I thought you (edit: we, it was Viper who mentioned it first) were talking about Red Faction 1, seeing as [you guys] are cherry picking reasons and ways to hate this game.

The difficulty? Not the same.

Ah fair enough, for some reason I thought you were talking about multiplayer.

 

[jimbo118]

Blow up Paris!!!?

I'll do what the Nazis never could!

 

[Krynn72]

You're equally delusional if you think earthquakes + body simulation + destructible buildings = WORST CALL OF DUTY EVER

Damn, bro. You're trying really hard to misunderstand me. If those things are as good as they suggest, they should be showing us those things first to prove it, not hiding them. My point with your hl2 comparison, is that Valve did exactly what I'm saying. They talked about their physics gameplay and how great it was, then some of the first released footage was that physics system in action, to back up their statements. Something which EA/Dice are not doing, be it a bad marketing strategy or trying to hide the fact that its not as good as they're suggesting.

I thought you were talking about Red Faction 1, seeing as you're cherry picking reasons and ways to hate this game.

I wasn't talking about Red Faction at all. That was someone else. I was however, pointing out that you were slamming red faction for overhyping their technology, and yet you seem to just assume EA/Dice are not, despite making pretty much the same exact claims.

 

[Stigmata]

I see where you're coming from, but so far we don't have any reason to doubt DICE exceptfor extrapolations based on assumptions. There is a chance that the singleplayer is shit, but it's BF3, man. We've waited six years and you're not even letting yourself get excited about it because you think it'll be too much like COD.

 

[Viperidae]

I'm intensely skeptical because I've been burned so many times getting hyped for games.

And I do have reason to doubt DICE: BC2 and EA.

 

[Krynn72]

Don't forget Medal of Honor.

 

[Shakermaker]

Don't forget Medal of Honor.

The multiplayer of MoH was okay. It was basically BF:BC2-Light.

 

[Viperidae]

BF:Shit-light?

 

[Shakermaker]

BF:Shit-light?

Nah, not shit. Just not very remarkable.

 

[Bad^Hat]

The multiplayer of MoH was okay.

Nope.

 

[Stigmata]

The multiplayer of MoH was "okay, I died immediately after spawning".

 

[Acepilotf14]

The multiplayer of MoH was "okay, I died immediately after spawning".

Black Ops?

 

[Stormy]

Bc2 was great to be fair