GI drops large BF3 update: 24 players for console, more

Scans:
http://battlefield.gamersverse.com/articles/655/game-informer-cover-issue-including-scans/

You do realise most of this has been on the Battlefield blog since the 4th right?
http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_company/archive/2011/02/04/battlefield-3-is-coming-preorder-now.aspx

Thankyou Geki! I shall be reading that later

PS3 can do better than PC mag has 256 players
DICE will put more players for PS3

First modern day fps that I’ve been interested in for quite some time, previous one was in the PS2 era.

Apparently DICE is having 64 players on PC only because the PC players complained about it for BC2 whilst the console players didnt. So theres SOME good in being a bunch of whiny babies, atleast.

it looks like EA played its cards well this time instead on getting up medal of honor they go with battlefield
i like MOH but battlefield has no reveals in its genre

@6:
it’s becoming a fact that Pc gamers are whiny babies

Everybody’s a whiny bitch, people are living through wars & natural disasters while some complain about something insignificant involving a video game.

@9 Amen to that! PC gamers, console fanboys… they’ve all complained some point in their gaming lives.

@6 I very much doubt it was because PC players complained. It’s more likely because Battlefield 2 had 64players and decreasing the player count would ultimately decrease the reputation of this being a true sequel.

@back_up MAG sucked

@11
Thats your opinion on the gameplay. Dosnt change much to the fact that it had X4 more players then the PC version of BF3 will.

@12 Which also doesn’t cloud the fact that BF3 will look so much better than MAG. (I’m not a hater of MAG, thought it was kinda fun in the beta. I’m just stating a fact )

^ Going off those scans its far from setting any standards.

How do you make a game where one platform has almost three times as many players on the maps? I mean, won’t the 360/PS3 maps be pretty desolate if they’re designed for 64 players; or the PC maps overcrowded, it they’re designed for only 24 players? Maybe Dice are doing two sets of maps … but that also seems quite strange.

@Gekidami,

“Apparently DICE is having 64 players on PC only because the PC players complained about it for BC2 whilst the console players didnt. So theres SOME good in being a bunch of whiny babies, atleast.”

someone is whining here, because consoles are not possible to generate so much people with such an incredible engine.

MAG engine is crap it supports so many people because of bad graphics. If consoles had more then just… 7800 GEFORCE in them, they could make 64 or more.
+ 256 people that PS3 supports is a bit delusional, because you still fight 8vs8 in one area. If DICE would do 64 on players you think they would not do it?

Gekidami, you are fucking stupid if you know shit then stop talking shit.

If this was possible they could do it, you say the same *facepalm* stuff like you said “Without regeneration” or “grenade in your hands feels odd”.

sony fanboys like to say if crappy game with crappy graphics like MAG supported something then BBF3 should do the same, but they don’t care about TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.. OF COURSE? =\\

PS: about scans, they look really good, the destruction is going to be MASSIVE and with EA sports animations it’s going to be incredible.

I don’t think player support would have much, if anything to do with the graphics. Heck you could (barely) run BFBC2 with a 7800, so your point seems invalid Erth.

Let’s be honest here, the only reason the PS3 version doesn’t support 64 players is because Microsoft won’t allow large patches through patching (& a game with that many players NEEDS it), & a developer likes to have both console games roughly the same, the PC is considered the 3rd wheel, so it always gets special treatment (not necessarily good or bad).

What does *the size of patches* have to do with the number of players a game supports? I don’t get it.

Well not necessarily the size, but MS is also picky on the frequency & a game supporting a lot of players will obviously need more frequent (or larger) patches/updates.

“Heck you could (barely) run BFBC2 with a 7800, so your point seems invalid Erth.”

thats why it is 24. Imagine on 7800 to run 64 players on one screen with some kind of EA Sports animations. It’s really heavy for the processor, RAM and videocard.

DICE don’t even push players higher then 64 players for PC. Even with my RIG if they will make 256 people for example… No one will able to run it.

MAG uses crappier engine and with crappy graphics for a REASON. To run Giant map with 256 people (still people fight 8vs8 on each sector)

I so hope the Tehran mission has Pasteur street so I can bring down every brick of Supreme Leader’s house on his head, hell yeah…

You can’t keep comparing PC & consoles Erth, different beasts, yes in the end they’re all computers, but games on console are built specifically for the exact hardware, if DICE wanted to support 64 players on PS3, it can be done, but it’ll be an issue on 360 because of MS standards.

Looks like GRAW with a bit more dust.

Gek the professional phag boy troll.

Oh yeah “hardly setting any standard” Yeah the grainy magazine pictures that were taken from a fucking SCANNER.. Because you’re looking at 1080p live action shots of whats going on right? Idiot go fuck yourself you troll.

@26, you’re such a baby, grow up a little.

Oh look, Erthazus getting upset about someone criticizing PC and a DICE game, what a surprise. What a butthurt PC fanboy.

You can bitch, moan, swear and lie all you like about MAG, the fact is it does FOUR TIMES the amount of players BF3 will do on PC. Thats FOUR TIMES more on the same map, at the same time.

And all of this without looking FOUR TIMES as bad as what i’m seeing in those scans.

But please Erthazus, keep crying, swearing and writing as much as possible in caps like a 12 year old. Maybe by some magic it’ll make you right, that hasnt happened yet, but you never know.

@19
Hum. Just out of sheer curiosity, what is the highest number of players in an online shooter on 360?

@11:
no
latest patch made it better

It’s all about bandwith game server game client. If you put in more players other things must go, like customization, destruction, special objects (ammo, medipacks etc.).

DICE had to let destructive glass go in BF2 as they didn’t manage to get this sent out to all clients whithout lag (among other things). Nowdays you’ve got better player connections and better networking code, so more can be sent betwwen server an dclient.

It’s still a balancing act though between player count and multiplayer content.

@28, No idea, highest that I’ve seen is 24, maybe something higher, but not that I’ve noticed.

from what i’ve read and seen in the screenshots, it looks a lot better than MAG imo. thought MAG was a steaming pile of horse shit.

“And all of this without looking FOUR TIMES as bad as what i’m seeing in those scans.”

That just shows that you are a Playstation fanboy. To say something like that you need to be a fucking idiot.

“You can bitch, moan, swear and lie all you like about MAG, the fact is it does FOUR TIMES the amount of players BF3 will do on PC.”

and MAG does it worse then a crappy Call Of duty game with 16 players. Retard.

“Oh look, Erthazus getting upset about someone criticizing PC and a DICE game, what a surprise. What a butthurt PC fanboy.”

What DICE have to do with PC and fanboyism? I have no common.

Everybody here thinks that you are retard and know nothing about consoles, PC or gaming.

Go and enjoy your Call Of duty if you like it, but stop saying bullshit like “hardly setting any standard” by looking at the crappy scans.

Also, good luck to Call Of duty to use destructible environments. Go back to your Call OF duty cave, no one cares =\

@Crysis, ” but games on console are built specifically for the exact hardware”

And that does not mean that any game with any features, with graphics, capabilities are possible on the Playstation 3 or Xbox 360.
Understand this logic?
If Tesselation is possible on PC with Direct X11 that does not mean that someone can make it specifically for the exact hardware. Understand logic?
You can’t built 64 players on outdated hardware with such an incredible engine that use NEXT GENERATION geometry explosives, dynamic lightning. Thats called technical difficulties.

^ lol Take a chill pill. Theres no point in getting so upset to the point where all you can do in insault me.

Though it perfectly shows that you really dont have a case.

@31
Reading around it does indeed seem like 24 is the max on 360. I’m hearing about an apparent bandwidth cap by MS thats limits games from going over 24.

This is pretty lame if turns out the 360 version is holding back the PS3 version…

“This is pretty lame if turns out the 360 version is holding back the PS3 version…”

PS fanboy thought. Of course…
It’s always something hold PS3 version because of XBOX 360 right?

Ahahaha upset Playstation fanboy =\\

In the 7 year old PC game Planetside the largest battles were between 300 players. Add in controlable tanks, planes, an inventory system, RPG style levelling and upgrades. The war was persistant.

lol Mag.

http://massively.joystiq.com/2010/01/14/why-you-should-be-playing-planetside-its-online-war/

@35 Dice would make 32 players or 64 players if they think is possible on PS3 or PSN and use 24 of xbox that would be least of problem…Real problem would be how to game run smooth with 32 players.Black Ops have 18 players and ”small map” but game run so Shitty.And on Battlefield 3 you need big map,vehicles,destruction,bigger view distance…

http://massively.joystiq.com/2010/01/14/why-you-should-be-playing-planetside-its-online-war/

300 players when full (which Mag never ever ever was).
Inventory system
Planes and tanks to name a couple of vehicles
Persistant war

Its also 7 years old.

@37
No, they’d keep the game equal on both PS3 & 360, they have no reason to give either of the 2 an advantage right now.

Blops is a terrible example because the PS3 port is a mess. KZ2 on the other hand has 32 players and runs without any trouble.

@38 Developer give advantage to some game like Burnout:Paradise and Just Cause 2(ps3 recording ).My logic is if you can give advantage you give

@39, Only if that advantage makes things easier, i don’t see how supplying 40 extra players on one version would make it easier (considering the console versions are supported in a similar way).

@39
The difference being that the Youtube recording feature in JC2 is hardly a big deal. If a multiplat game has more players then the other system on the otherhand it’ll seriously damage its sales on that system.
Fact is, no ones going to pick up JC2 on PS3 just because it can record to youtube. More players in MP on the otherhand is a massive advantage.

Are you really saying that 32 players in MW2 (remember that if they could they would, right?) would be to much of a strain on the PS3, but 32 players in the visually superior KZ2 wouldnt be? Your logic just dosnt stand up.

And you can look at this in another way too; If a dev making a 360 exclusive could have more then 24 players online, dont you think they would?

On PS3 several exclusives do.

“still people fight 8vs8 on each sector”
wrong

anyway, as said, disapointing.
a massive player count was always the signature feature of bf. And now they debunk it for what? Graphics? Fail. Graphics is nice for a SP. in a MP there are a hell of a lot others things way more important than graphics, for exapmle the key features of ur ip. And as far as im concerned graphics never were, playercount absolutely was.

Back on topic.

Battlefield 3 looks absolutely awesome! Seriously cannot wait for this one to drop. Now whether to perform a complete overhaul on my computer, or settle for the Xbox 360 version ^_^.

“No, they’d keep the game equal on both PS3 & 360, they have no reason to give either of the 2 an advantage right now.”

Oh yeah and Dead Space 2 for PS3 have…. a game and Medal of Honor have an old Ps1 classic MoH game, so your logic fails here again and don’t try to say that because of something.

Ports from consoles on PC have anti aliasing and filters because it’s a damn option that is possible on that platform. If DICE can support the game they can do it like they did with recording thing on PS3 with Just Cause 2.

You fail at logice so many times by saying it’s 360 fault. No, it’s not. If this was possible on PS3 they could do it.

you can shit all what you want you get 24 players officially because of the PS3 hardware restrictions. Your brain obviously don’t understand that 512 MB ram, 7800 Geforce is OLD as shit. Nvidia don’t even sell them anymore for like 4 years.

@mojo, “still people fight 8vs8 on each sector”
“wrong”

YES they are. They CAN fight together in one place thats for 100% but the game design is made that you fight in SECTORS and you don’t feel that scale of battle. Want me to prove it?

http://www.gametrailers.com/user-movie/mag-the-128-player-stampede/339199 128 players in one place LAG as shit! Clusterfuckness.

” Fail. Graphics is nice for a SP. in a MP there are a hell of a lot others things way more important than graphics”

If you never played Battlefield games before, GTFO please! each Battlefield game pushed the hardware and graphics so STFU!

lol
want a hug?

@41 ”This is pretty lame if turns out the 360 version is holding back the PS3 version…”
That is why we argue If DICE could make 32 players on PS3 I think they would add ad.Just like Steam update is going to be on PS3 version of portal and xbox is not going to have that feature. POINT IS : 360 is not holding back PS3 version because they could add more player to PS3 version if they could.Homefront is going to have 32 players on BOTH XBOX 360 and PS3.But the game dont’t have Destruction and graphic is not so great….

“Oh yeah and Dead Space 2 for PS3 have…. a game and Medal of Honor have an old Ps1 classic MoH game” I’m sure EA was doing that out of the kindness of their hearts 8^|