Sections

Quick quotes: DICE has “massive plan” for Battlefield 3 DLC

Wednesday, 12th October 2011 11:00 GMT By Johnny Cullen

“We’ve completely restructured our studio around it. Nowadays, we have operations team who looks at the title when it starts getting closer to launch (or long before) with potential downloadable content and so on, to really have a plan. Otherwise you’re quite likely to start slipping. If you’re focusing just before release on what you’re going to ship post-launch, then I think you have problems.

“So, yes there is a massive plan in place.” – DICE creative director Lars Gustavsson, speaking to MCV about BF3′s DLC plans. Game’s out at the end of the month.

Latest

48 Comments

  1. viralshag

    I can’t wait for BF3. I have a feeling it’s going to bring me hours of fun if the beta was anything to judge it by. After finally getting some hours in with Caspian Border, I have no major worries and only some minor things such as pad sensitivity while in vehicles and a few other things.

    #1 3 years ago
  2. endgame

    it would be stupid if it wouldn’t have had. :)

    #2 3 years ago
  3. polygem

    i am one of those who weren´t that impressed by the beta (well knowing it was just a beta). still can´t wait for the final game, but the beta really left me totally unimpressed. there have been some fun moments but overall i thought it felt pretty boring and uninspired…after all the promises i wanted something that played better. i rather felt like playing bfbc2 would be the better choice. while the beta was on it was really hard to stop playing the awesome gears 3 for a while just to play the mediocore bf3 beta – unfortunately i felt like wasting my time…and this is from a guy who never really was a gears fan but a bf fan…i really hope they will deliver – i love the franchise – if a bf game really works out they way it´s supposed to be and everyone really works as a team it is the best mp experience you can have imo…(unfortunately this doesn´t happen too often)

    #3 3 years ago
  4. Naaame

    wouldn’t have this overpriced DLC problem if they just allowed modding.

    #4 3 years ago
  5. GrimRita

    One of the things that let down BC2 was the lack of good quality DLC. After the spat with Steam, I fully expected DICE to have some new things to offer.

    DLC is great and can extend the life of the game, providing its done correctly and not half baked(like Vietnam)or has extreme limitations (like Total War titles do)

    Modding is great but takes a very long time for anything to arrive – by then, the game is old and people have(probably) moved on

    #5 3 years ago
  6. MadFingerz

    @3
    I also found the beta somewhat boring (I only played the PS3 version) but that was mostly due to two reasons:

    1) I disliked that Metro map.
    2) There were no vehicles, and BF without vehicles just isn’t the same.

    I surely would have had more fun playing Caspian Border. Will see how much fun the game is in maps as good as Golf of Oman.

    #6 3 years ago
  7. OlderGamer

    I am one of those that was wise enough to understand that what we played was not a Beta in any way shape or form. We played a demo. A beta is something entirely different. A beta is a time when a game will undergo several changes based on what does and doesn’t work. Obviously bugs and glitches would be exposed, but also gameplay balances would be adressed. Often time a beta will change the direction of a games development.

    This wasn’t any of that.

    The many bugs in the game were so aparrent that they didn’t need thousands of hours of extensive testing to expose. They weren’t overlooked they were ignored(perhaps due to lack of dev time). The game will have a substantial day one patch.

    I wasn’t impressed with the demo either. I have a very limited game budget these days, and I canceled my BF3 preorder. I wasn’t impressed enough to make BF3 one of my likly three full priced game purchases for the year. And it wasn’t the bugs.

    It was the fact that what I played wasn’t BF. It had no veichels. So the game has jets? Where were they? I wanted to play em. Very little of the map was destructable. The genreal aiming was not what BF has ever been. The map size was way too small. The over all experience left me feeling as if I was playing a CoD game. And that is why I canceled. Dice did that on purpose.

    BF fans will buy the game, no need to show of the game to them. However legions of CoD fans would not be buying the game, yet many of those same gamers would easily download and play a free demo. Even better if they call it a Beta and give the people a sense of entitlement and importance.

    I just didn’t like it.

    It is a battlefield game. Something like the Metro map shouldn’t even be in the game to begin with, and was a horrible choice to put into the “beta”. So I will pass on BF3 for now. Maybe in a year or so I will buy a game of the year edition and score some DLC free or something. Maybe not.

    The next shooter I am looking forward to is Starhawk. That game can’t get here fast enough for me.

    #7 3 years ago
  8. GrimRita

    @6 – Metro did have a vehicle in Alpha testing but was removed for beta. It did make the map very unbalanced.

    #8 3 years ago
  9. MadFingerz

    @8
    You are either someone involved in the process of the game or an idiot who is pulling crap from his ass. What the hell makes you say it was a demo instead of a beta? In case you didn’t know, one of the major things they wanted to test was how the servers handled a certain ammount of players it without crashing. They don’t need the last build to test this. Yes, the Metro map sucks but it’s only one of the maps in the final game, hardly a reason to decide if it is worth buying the final game or not.

    Metro actually seems like it will be one of the maps where people who are more interested in infantry gamneplay can play on. Nothing wrong with having more options in the game. I’ll be happy as long as I can play 2-3 hours in a map of my choosing.

    #9 3 years ago
  10. GrimRita

    @9 – erm, I think you meant #7 :-p

    #10 3 years ago
  11. Noodlemanny

    @OlderGamer.
    Who says their not going to do any changes? If they do release a day one patch that still means they got data and made changes before release from the beta. Also you mentioned that you cancelled your pre-order because the demo didn’t have vehicles or proper destruction. Yeah that sucked but the full game still going to have them, why are you cancelling your pre-order just simply because there where no vehicles in the beta (not to mention at the end of the beta for PC they added caspian border which has loads of vehicles and jets)? Where’s the logic in that?
    Also wtf is wrong with the metro map. Its different, oh shit, I forgot that a little variation is totally wrong. Also maybe they put it in the beta because it is different and they wanted to get data on it to see what worked, what didn’t and all that other stuff.
    Ultimately it’s whether you like the game or not and that’s just personal preference. I’m just pointing out some of your reasons simply don’t make sense.

    #11 3 years ago
  12. manamana

    gimme, gimme, gimme!

    #12 3 years ago
  13. manamana

    @OG did you really missed the links I posted in the news couple of days ago? Talking about Grand Bazaar (rush, PS3 footage) and Operation Firestorm (conquest, PC) – Battlefield fun like crazy, man!

    #13 3 years ago
  14. viralshag

    @7, I’m not a games developer or involved in making games or even close to it. But this:

    “Often time a beta will change the direction of a games development.”

    Just strikes me as all sorts of wrong from what I know of a beta to be. If a beta is what they use to potentially change the direction of the game’s development, something has gone very wrong.

    And the fact that so many people complain about what map they got to play on says it all. People are acting like they are owed more than what they were given. It is after all, a beta. I imagine due to the time it took to complete Metro during each game, they must have gotten a ton feedback. Not to mention it’s the map that seems most foreign to the series, whereas Caspian seems pretty much solid, I imagine they didn’t need to get much more from that.

    And if people didn’t get a chance to play Caspian Border, then they really can’t say things such as “it’s not BF” as they have extremely limited knowledge of what’s on offer.

    I enjoyed Metro and quite frankly if every map is going to be a vehicle filled run fest, I would be rather disappointed. Metro is a great map for some quick intense combat.

    #14 3 years ago
  15. DSB

    Caspian Border is largely great, but I just don’t get why DICE keep making maps without any sort of attention for how they play with the actual weapons included. They just strike me as not giving a fuck about the details, and details matter when you’d like people to spend 100+ hours on your game.

    And viralshag is spot on. If a beta includes major changes, that means the developer has lost the plot. Traditionally the graduation from alpha usually means that the game has all the bells and whistles it needs, and that they’re gonna start the spit and polish.

    #15 3 years ago
  16. polygem

    i get the point of OG. the bfbc2 beta was much better imo.. it had lots of bugs etc. too and pretty much all of them still were in the final built – still i enjoyed it so much more…i am a bit concerned about that bug and glitchesfest in the bf3 demo too. also i agree on what he criticized about the gameplay changes. you know i am kind of an older gamer too and i too really do think twice these days which games to buy and which not. this is not only because of the money but because of time management issues. i just don´t have the time to play every game that could be interesting. i only want the top experiences for my cash. i kept my preorder for bf3 but i am really sceptical. i will watch reviews closely and decide then. and this is bad because i love bf..there are so many great games this fall and right now i am superhooked on the fantastic gears 3 (which i cannot say often enough).

    #16 3 years ago
  17. viralshag

    Well, to be fair guys, if you went into something that was and IS a beta and expected a perfect play through, then you probably should have avoided it altogether and waited for an actual demo or the final reviews.

    Metro is one map of what, seven? There must have been a lot more than one map that you were basing your pre-orders on. I can understand that fundamental design choices put you off but if it was simply the case of not enjoying one map then that does seem a flawed logic.

    #17 3 years ago
  18. OlderGamer

    As always, some clerification is needed.

    I canceled my preorder because I didn’t have fun in the demo. Lack of veihicels, poor map, etc lead me to feel as if I wasn’t playing a BF game. I just didn’t enjoy it at all. Lots of reasons. I also don’t like the new classes. I thought they had it about perfect in BFBC1, was good in Modern Combat BF as well, class wise.

    Everytime I talk about this game with people I hear excuses. Ok so Metro sucked, buy it anyways. Why? In every BF experience I have ever had the maps rotate in a set of play lists. If the game launches with 3 maps one of them will be Metro, ten maps one of them will be metro. Not like it is going away. But it is just one map, by itself it isn’t a reason to cancel, and it wasn’t my only reason.

    At some point it is ok to not buy a sequal, because gasp – you didn’t enjoy the experiences of playing the demo. Thats what happened for me. And yes Metro was one of the reasons I didn’t enjoy it.

    Like many of us, I have beta tested games. Even done some Alpha work(Rift was the last game that I tested). BF3 was a demo. A testing period allows for feedback to be taken(how many of us that played the thing gave detailed feedback on BF3?), it is a time for changes. Some tech side(does it run/crash is it compatible, does it preform smoothly within accepted tolerances) some of it gameplay( is it balanced? One gun over powered? What are player tendancies in given situations, does it flow, does it do what we intended it to do, etc). All of that needs time.

    The game launches 15 days after the testing. What part of those mere 15 days do you supose was used for feedback evaluation? Implementation? What changes were made in 15 days? And in those 15 days, the game goes gold, gets pressed, shipped and stocked.

    A Beta? really? Nope, closser to a demo. And the build we played was dated, likly the many glitches and bugs already squished. That is not to say that should a catistrouphic problem pop up durring the demo that it wouldn’t have been delt with. That isn’t to say that somewhere in a DICE office someone said “Oh shit, people really hate Metro” – just look at the number of times we have read articals on Dice defending or commenting on the “beta”. Sure Dice was watching the community and the game during that phase.

    What I am pointing out is that this was not the standard process for a beta. But prolly some of you think so, because this type of thing has been done before on consoles. Using the word Beta makes the players feel all warm and fuzzy. It gives them a sense of empowerment and importance. But again, Beta testing is testing. What exactly were DICE testing? Nothing more then with the EA release of Madden Football demo imo.

    So you can keep your BF3 for now. And understand I have bought and enjoyed the past four BF releases. I really liked those games. This one doesn’t make the cut right now, so i am passing on it. Think of it like this, if you had a sports team, and could carry 55 players, you might carry some that weren’t as good as they should be in order to make the actual game field. If you could only carry 15 players on your roster, you would have to cut some players that didn’t meassure up. Thats more or less what I have done.

    I don’t have as much cash as i would like to spend on games, so i had to make some deep cuts. What I played of the BF3 game would me shifted my allowed game budget somewhere else. Why that pisses people off I don’t understand. Anyone with half a shread of common sense could see the Beta/demo offered a weak experience. Sorry DICE that mattered to me, and I am not going to buy it anyways. Not right now anyways.

    #18 3 years ago
  19. viralshag

    @18, I don’t think people are pissed off with your purchasing choices. More the fact that you are making comments that are somewhat based on misinformation or no information at all.

    “It had no veichels. So the game has jets? Where were they? I wanted to play em.” – In Caspian Border for one, there in all their glory. I tried them, it was great. It’s not like some great wool has been pulled over your eyes, the game does indeed, as they said, have vehicles with (a) huge open map(s).

    “Something like the Metro map shouldn’t even be in the game to begin with, and was a horrible choice to put into the “beta”.” – Why not? What’s wrong with having some choice and variation in the game? Plus why was it a bad choice for the beta? You and I don’t know what data they were getting from the map. As I said before, Caspian was pretty solid, this testing could have been purely for behind the scenes/server issues.

    “Anyone with half a shread of common sense could see the Beta/demo offered a weak experience.” – I like to think I have more than a half a shred of common sense and as I said before, I found it to be a very enjoyable experience.

    I don’t think what you’re getting is “excuses” for a “weak experience” but a difference of opinion from your own from people that don’t happen to agree with you. Much like all of what I have said above. At the end of the day, it’s your choice not to buy the game based on what you have played.

    #19 3 years ago
  20. OlderGamer

    Maybe Viral.

    “Yes, the Metro map sucks but it’s only one of the maps in the final game, hardly a reason to decide if it is worth buying”

    ” because the demo didn’t have vehicles or proper destruction. Yeah that sucked but the full game still going to have them, why are you cancelling your pre-order ”

    It was interesting because I sent out a mail over xbox Live a bit ago to those folks on my friends list that I have played BF with in the past. I had people on there with even less budget then me that I knew had the game preordered, a couple of them doing so just to play online with me and my youngest son. I didn’t want them buying the game and getting upset because I hadn’t told them I wasn’t getting it. So I sent out a mail. a couple of the responses were likewise of mine, they weren’t getting it either. Some of em were down right mean spirited over it. But most of em that said they were getting it had lots of excuses why I was being stupid for not getting it.

    I didn’t like it, not getting it. Really is that simple. Its when I try and explain it to people that the trouble starts. But when you tell someone you don’t want to get the game, most will ask why not?

    Can’t win.

    #20 3 years ago
  21. manamana

    Buy it or not. I love the new classes. Especially Assault.

    #21 3 years ago
  22. OrbitMonkey

    OG played a beta, that’s as near dammit a demo as your gonna get. He didn’t like it so cancelled his pre-order. What’s the fuss? Not like his declared ubdying hatred for all things DICE O_O

    #22 3 years ago
  23. MadFingerz

    @OlderGamer

    Ok, you won’t buy the game. Whatever, your choice. But just stop calling it a demo. You’re making yourself look stupid. The purpose of it was not promotional, it was testing, so it IS a beta, not a demo. It’s that simple. If you can’t understand something like that than you surely aren’t as bright as you’re old. The ammount of days until release doesn’t matter because you don’t know which build they were using for the beta and what exactly they were testing.

    Now, I don’t know if Dice will actually release a demo for it, but if they do, you can believe it will be quite different from what you saw now. For one, it will be a map with vehicles, that’s for sure.

    #23 3 years ago
  24. viralshag

    There’s no fuss. It’s not like I’m pulling him up on any of his personal issues with the game such as his dislike of the classes or the aiming and screaming at him that he’s totally wrong and that he should love DICE until the end of time.

    I just think there were some points that needed some clarification. Which he provided. It’s a back and forth thing, last time I checked, it was known as a conversation.

    #24 3 years ago
  25. DSB

    I’d like to ask the reverse question. Once you take out the jets, the beautiful scenery and the awe-inspiring backdrops, what’s so great about Caspian Border?

    It has a couple of tight settlements where a squad can camp out and pick off anyone who comes knocking, and if you’re playing US, and they control the rocky outcrops as well, then they can pick people off before they get there, without even caring about what weapon they use. Based on the weapons I’ve seen, I reckon they only thing that won’t kill people from miles away is an SMG.

    Really, if the guys were using sniper rifles, I could eat that, but they don’t even have to go that far to do it.

    I fail to see the brilliant level design. It looks amazing, and the gameplay itself is the best it’s been since BF2, but there’s no discernable idea to the maps themselves. It just feels sloppy to me.

    #25 3 years ago
  26. Dano

    @ oldergamer I,m sure none of us care if YOU buy the game but to spread your non informed crap here sounds more like a old troll. You don’t even know how many maps there are!(9 to start and 4 more with the preorder)And yes it was a beta clearly stated by DICE way to many times for people like you that talk uninformed. Did you see the video that #13 talks about? I thought it was PC footage when I first saw it! Oh and i’m sure you have no idea of the HD texture pack that will be on both xbox and ps3 discs? I didn’t think so!! And for the rest of you that like to research things before they spout off. Here are some changes that will make it into the 25th disc or patch.

    Gameplay changes:

    When placing a spawn beacon or a enemy motion sensor as a sniper, the devices would appear red indicating that it could not be placed in that location. When the device could be placed, it would turn yellow. Very helpful visual cue as the beta gave no cue.
    Your player screen loses color saturation as a new visual indicator (besides the timer) when you go out of bounds.
    Same sort of visual indicator as the out of bounds screen appears but with blood surrounding it when you’re low on health.
    Hit boxes were dramatically improved. My bullets didn’t magically go through enemies’ torsos.
    When running as the assault/medic class, the visual indicator of an incapacitated teammate is more prominent with a circle surrounding the defrib symbol now.
    Jet stick controls on console are similar to BF1943 on console. If you don’t prefer those controls, they are completely customizable. Also, when your jet is low on health, it becomes a little more difficult to control until it is completely incapacitated and falls from the sky. Y (or triangle) switches between your heat-seeking missiles and your cannon. R-bumper (or R1) deploys smoke.
    Flying choppers felt almost exactly like BFBC2. Was able to fly right away.
    Changing views in the vehicles has been moved back to the R-stick much like BFBC1 unlike up on the D-pad on BFBC2.
    Parachutes take little longer to deploy than BFBC2, and while in the air they are a little harder to control to your destination.
    Death animations look more realistic. No more funky physics where their body flies 30 feet across the screen after being killed. Player’s eyes are closed when they die.
    Knifing animation looks a lot better, especially when knifing someone on the ground.
    Frostbite 2 was in full effect in terms of destruction. Buildings were tumbling down, everything was being destroyed around me in most every map I played.
    The amount of damage it takes to kill an enemy on regular mode seems a little less than the beta.
    I was able to equip the knife on the PS3 build. Not sure about the Xbox 360.
    You CAN spawn in to jets in both console builds, there is an option on the menu spawn screen to do so.
    After walking away from the Final Hours event and spending a good 2-3 hours on this current build of the console Battlefield 3 multiplayer, I can honestly say my excitement for October 25th has grown exponentially. Though I never doubted DICE, I can compare the beta experience to a truck drivers windshield: It was hard to see what was in front of me with the constant barrage of bugs.

    For the doubters, haters, and naysayers, you may want to think again come October 25th.

    #26 3 years ago
  27. viralshag

    @DSB, If I’m honest, I much preferred the intense combat of Metro and the map overall. A lot of the time, in decent matches anyway, a more visible front line was created where you really had to fight to get ground or defend it.

    Caspian definitely offers some fun in the vehicles but again, I much preferred the infantry battles around the settlements.

    #27 3 years ago
  28. DSB

    @27 It’s funny you should say that, I feel much the same way.

    I think Metro critically has pacing issues, and I’m not a fan of the last chokepoint. Maybe it’s meant to be paced unevenly, so people can experience taking the first points, and then getting locked in trying to take the last, but maybe I’m just too much of a perfectionist in that respect. I much prefer pitting people as evenly as possible.

    Caspian Border kinda reinforces a major problem I had with BC2. DICE make pretty maps, and they make big maps, but beyond the geographical location of the bases, it seems to me like they never bother to think gameplay into them anymore. Hopefully Metro won’t be alone in being a smaller, sharper design.

    #28 3 years ago
  29. GrimRita

    One issue here. If you are looking to show why Battlefield is different to any other FPS, you show the reasons why – in other words, Caspian Border in beta.

    Alpha with Metro, since this was closed and aimed at current BF players, wasnt much of an issue.

    Clearly by using Metro again, has provided more negative feedback than positive – hence DICE’s attempt to chuck CB out to the masses for a limited time, followed by all the PR hot air.

    #29 3 years ago
  30. manamana

    This should answer many questions: http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/

    Especially the one from Oct,3rd.

    Believe it or not.

    #30 3 years ago
  31. viralshag

    Honestly though, how would they gain more interest from new players to BF by just showing off more of the same thing they have done every time? It’s getting to the point where I find it funny that BF players complain about COD being the same old thing when they all seem to be asking for… the exact same thing as they have been playing in previous BF games.

    Everyone knows that we’re going to get the big CB style maps, we know that because a lot of people have played it and confirmed “YES, IT FEELS LIKE BF!” If anything, Metro was to show that there will be more to BF3 than just the same old stuff.

    #31 3 years ago
  32. DSB

    True dat. Personally I do think it’s comforting that Karkand will be coming back. That was a truly great map. The buildings were tight, where in BC2 you could usually fit a tank between them, and that not just made it look bad, but also made it a lot less of an infantry environment.

    I wouldn’t want them to remake BF2, but I would like it if they took the best parts of it, and brought it into the new world. I’m disappointed that they completely dumped the squad-centric style. If anybody was gonna make an online shooter where people worked together, it was BF2-era DICE. They actually dared to force people to work together back then. Sadly they’ve travelled a far more common road since BF2142.

    I also don’t think that anybody needs miles and miles of maps unless everything on them is made with gameplay in mind. Beyond putting it on the box, and having fanboys list it as a great achievement, what’s really great about it? What are you getting that wasn’t in BF2, beyond the eyecandy?

    Then again, I still need EA to put the game on Steam before I can actually play. I would preorder it, personally.

    #32 3 years ago
  33. GrimRita

    Battlefield is all about the vehicles, lots of players, large maps – and Metro didnt tick any of those boxes. So if you have CoD fans who are tired of the same old crap, it was a superb opportunity to win some new players over.

    I know a few CoD players who tried the beta and said it was just too much like CoD in gameplay terms and werent impressed at all.

    Yes *WE* know that BF will provide some large scale maps/vehicles but all I am saying is, that this was DICE/EAs chance to bring some new people to play and shout ‘THIS is why you should buy Battlefield’

    Even from people I play with in BC2, they came away thinking BF3 is just much of the same but without the bullet proof leaves. Maybe CB would have changed our minds.

    And, yes the bugs in the beta didnt bother me too much but DICE have an excellent track record leaving broken bits in their game of late. But I am still betting that day 1 patch will be around 1.5 gig in size lol

    #33 3 years ago
  34. viralshag

    @Grim, I really think that’s the problem though. I highly doubt that FPS fans out there DON’T know what BF is about. If they did, and they thought that vehicles and giant maps were the next best thing since sliced bread, then more people would happily be playing BF over games such as CoD.

    #34 3 years ago
  35. DSB

    @33 I wouldn’t be too confident in that as a universal view. I’ve favored CoD quite heavily until Black Ops, and I played a lot of BF2 before that. So have most of the people I play with.

    Personally I love the fact that they’ve taken a lesson from CoD and turned up the pace, refined the controls, and mostly toned the weapons to a place where the player doesn’t look like an overwhelmed recruit every time he fires off a round, with the resulting inaccuracy to match. Those are the changes that make me interested.

    The thing that turns me off as a CoD player is mostly big maps with nothing in them, and vehicles that are pretty gratuitous. No real clearly defined purpose, beyond whichever random guy is at the controls.

    In CoD, and most definitely MW2, all the maps were designed purely with gameplay in mind, and accurately polished to accomodate a certain playing style. The fact that I go into a game like BC2 and BF3, and just see big wide open maps with no real purpose is a major turnoff, because most of the time I won’t be focused on playing the map, I’ll just be travelling across it, with all the agonies of being sniped, bombed or taking a cheap death from some guy who’s found a bush he really likes.

    That’s pretty much what I hear from my CoD friends who’ve played the beta as well. I reckon they’d have considerably more fun with a BF2-sized map, with that same level of detail.

    #35 3 years ago
  36. manamana

    @DSB Atacama Desert from BC2 was big and has great gameplay, imo. Heavy metal not so much. And Port Valdez is certainly annoying sometimes, yet I had really great moments there. We are talking conquest. And I don’t mind whats on a box, certainly it has nothing to do with achievements but with fun. Why else would I play a game?

    But in the end DICE got maps for the most of us, thats what counts. And BF3 will be no different.

    #36 3 years ago
  37. GrimRita

    @36 yeah I agree with your views on those maps. I also HATED White Pass for ages simply because of the bugs, then one day, actually started to enjoy it.

    @DSB – I havent played CoD and refuse to because its a shoddy port on the PC so I cant compare the two games – all I can go on is what my friends tell me from their experiences with both titles.

    With any luck, DICE will release a demo just prior or just after release for piece of mind after the abuse the beta got.

    #37 3 years ago
  38. ultramega

    @35
    On the contrary, that’s why I got sick of Call of Duty after MW2. Just the fact that maps felt so cramped. I dunno. I enjoy the freedom of more open maps.

    #38 3 years ago
  39. manamana

    “In CoD, and most definitely MW2, all the maps were designed purely with gameplay in mind, and accurately polished to accomodate a certain playing style.”

    And all maps are designed as run&gun maps. Where in BF you need to team up and travel to get your objective done.

    I’ve been sniped more times in MW2, than in BC2. But I stopped playing MW2 almost a year ago, while BC2 disc still rotates ;-)

    #39 3 years ago
  40. Fin

    Just like to point out, again, if a MW3 beta was released in the state the BF3 one was, with a shit map, there would be no end to the abuse Activision/Infinity Ward would get.

    When the reverse happens, you get people jumping to the defence of BF3. The beta or demo or whatever you want to call it (it’s buggy enough to be an early alpha, I think) should convince people to buy the game, as well as perform whatever technical/load-testing task DICE required.
    Not only has it not done so, it’s actually caused players to not want to buy the game. Again, as I’ve said before, the reasons don’t matter, the PR damage has already been done – any pre-release software released to the public should never turn people off this much.

    #40 3 years ago
  41. viralshag

    Well I like both styles at the end of the day. I don’t think BF will ever be able to incorporate all that makes COD great just like I don’t think COD will ever do the BF things even close to good.

    #41 3 years ago
  42. OrbitMonkey

    @DSB That’s pretty much summed up all my problems with Battlefield in general…

    @viralshag, my post wasn’t aimed at YOU specifically, but it seemed there were a few guys taking exception to OG’s opinion…. its called a general observation.

    #42 3 years ago
  43. manamana

    @viral: agreed.

    #43 3 years ago
  44. DSB

    @Manamana – I fail to see any kind of tactical scenario being presented in those maps. The bases and the scenery is just thrown together to look good enough for snuff. Nobody would actually live in villages like that, let alone use them for training exercises. Whereas in BF2 with Strike at Karkand you had the urban setting where the tanks are seriously at risk, and in Gulf of Oman you had the beach landing that took massive coordination. In BC2 people just rush ahead mindlessly without needing to care about very much except putting a cap in whoever might put a cap in them.

    @Manana again – So you aren’t running and gunning in BF3? Could’ve fooled me. I’m yet to see any major occurence of people forming coherent units in either BC2 and BF3, that doesn’t involve a concerted effort by a clan, who might do the very same thing in any other game. In BF2 you quite often had a strong incentive to, since people were often yelling at you, with the commanders job being mostly just that. People had an incentive to play with eachother.

    I’ll be lucky to get a lift when someone runs off with the last vehicle like a headless chicken in the new games. The underlying intelligence of the design eludes me.

    Also, the fact that you prefer one over the other doesn’t really say anything. Congrats on having preference. I tossed BC2 after a month, not counting the Vietnam pick-me-up, does that make it universally bad?

    CoD is certainly a twitch shooter, and it is very much about pitting player against player with no frills, but I like the fact that every chokepoint is flanked by two more, meaning that most teams will be too incoherent to hold more than two of those at any one time, leaving the backdoor open. I love the ability to use my head, to come up behind an entire team and take them out one by one, when they feel the most comfortable.

    And if you read the above, my problem isn’t being sniped. I’d welcome that. It’s mostly people using machineguns to do it, when they really should be seeing some form of spread at those ranges. Either the maps don’t fit the weapons, or vice versa.

    @37 It’s the matchmaker, isn’t it? Black Ops was terrible on PC, but MW2 was, as far as I could tell, almost free of bugs when both the Xbox360 and PS3 versions contained some serious exploits around launch.

    #44 3 years ago
  45. manamana

    “I’ll be lucky to get a lift when someone runs off with the last vehicle like a headless chicken in the new games.”

    Happens sometimes. Most of the time I use Quads,Tanks, Helicopter, Humvees and whatnot to get across the maps, it happens that teamplayers give me a lift and vice versa, so I probably didn’t encounter as many “headless chicken” as you did. Albeit helicopter “pilots” that can’t fly but thats a different story.

    “Nobody would actually live in villages like that, let alone use them for training exercises.”
    Seems to me that the operation métro and Bazaar from BF3 should do well in this regard, then. As in BC2 you are certainly right but it doesn’t ruined my gaming experience.

    “I love the ability to use my head, to come up behind an entire team and take them out one by one, when they feel the most comfortable.” Thats exactly what happens in BC2 at times. Especially in conquest, where many players rush from one flag to another, leaving gaps to conquer.

    And mind you, I also use my head in BC2. I like the twist and turns. And I personally can’t stand the hectic gameplay of CoD anymore. But that boils down to personal likeings.

    “Either the maps don’t fit the weapons, or vice versa.”
    I hadn’t had that feeling, albeit my personal weapon choice was wrong …

    And I get all your points and doubts. It’s just that I enjoyed the beta a lot, even if it was broken, unbalanced and untypical for BF. But guess what, I may not be as picky as you are. ;-)

    #45 3 years ago
  46. DSB

    @45 All fair points. I wasn’t suggesting you didn’t use your head in BC2. Mind you I’m not trying to say that the game should be disqualified, or even that isn’t a good game. I just wish those things were better.

    It is random, as all online games are, but that’s all the more reason why I think it’s a shame that more isn’t done to try and push people in terms of how they use vehicles, the maps, and eachother. A tank or an IFV used properly when taking a point is completely and utterly invaluable. They’re siegebreakers, they’re the single best weapon against entrenched players.

    Why not do training courses like Brink that teach people tricks and tactics, before they’re allowed in one of them?

    I don’t see any reason for the outcrops on Caspian Border, overlooking the two spawnpoints. Why would you give people a firing point into a base like that? Vietnam had huge problems with the same thing. Why not add a bit of terrain and give people some semblance of approach?

    Like I said, I’ve enjoyed BF3 in the beta vastly more than I did BC2. For me it’s gone from a middle of the road shooter to a real contender this time around. I would preorder it if it was on Steam.

    #46 3 years ago
  47. manamana

    I personally hope that there will be a “beach landing” map anytime soon. I just love those beach landing scenarios.

    … Thinking a moment about the last sentence … Oh well, its just games. :-D

    #47 3 years ago
  48. manamana

    @46 You really made a very good point regarding PTFO! I often asked myself, why there are so many lonewolfs, when playing as a team and going after the objective could be so more efficient…. And in this regard, I don’t see DICE doing anything about it. But lets wait and see. I actually like your idea giving some tactic lessons for new players, why not send it to DICE?! They try with points for suppressing fire and spotting but I guess it’s not enough to stick together as a battalion. ;-)

    #48 3 years ago

Comments are now closed on this article.