Battlefield 3 BETA ENDS

[NoScream~SPARTA~]

Battlefield 3 BETA ENDS

 

What did you truly think?

Was it what you anticipated/ expected?

METRO & CASPIAN BOARDER

RUSH & CONQUEST

 

I played both & it was all fun & frustration for me, the problem with 'METRO RUSH' was the opposite to 'CASPIAN BOARDER CONQUEST'

DICE says: ALL MAPS ALL MODES

 

In Metro rush, teamwork plays better with common sequential objectives, in Caspian boarder conquest, I ended up running in circles from the start, every twat driving off one man vehicles. In rush that problem did not exist but both had problems. The game mechanics fail to make the teams act as one in situations, where they (DICE) could of made it so the USA or RU has a max of RECON/ASSAULT/ENG/SUPPORT.

 

Overall I was impressed & will be playing the final but is it all I expected? NO, I ended up with laggy servers, disconnects, no management of squads, full clips into targets & not killing them, buggy maps, tanks that can not knock down poles, snipers that don't help the team.

 

What was impressive was GFX performance, one 580GTX @ 1920x1200 on dual displays, still pushing 50+ FPS on full. Multi threading CPU worked, 8 threads running smooth, game play was fun overall.

 

 

I did notice that most people liked it but with reservations....

[EMT~SPARTA~]

I'm in the same boat as you Viper. Will I end up buying it in the next couple weeks? Yes... Most of the problems I have with the game are probably going to be addressed in the final version, such as the laggy servers, the hit box(shoot someone and nothing happens to them for a half second) and other.

 

The big map was awesome...

Operation Metro was also much fun...

 

I will give what i truly think of the game once the final version comes out and I get a good couple of days on it. I really can't judge this game on the beta.

[Yankee~SPARTA~]

I enjoyed it and am looking forward to the full release with all features unlocked.

[Rooster90]

It was more or less what I was expecting, and a big improvement over the Alpha. It's certainly not a BF2 clone, but I also think it's unfair to call it BC2 with bigger maps and more vehicles. It's definitely a hybrid of ideas over the span of every BF game to date, and I'm sure DICE will be vigilantly fleshing out that balance over the coming months after release.

 

I haven't personally experienced any lag or hit detection problems myself, but I won't say they weren't issues for others. New server back-end, re-written netcode, all will be fixed in a matter of time. The netcode and hit detection already beat the hell out of BC2 imo. To this day there's still a good .5 - 1 second of delay before somebody drops when you shoot them on that game. That and it takes at least half a clip per enemy.

 

BF3 already feels more solid than the past few FPS's I've bought on release. The two main negatives of the beta are the server crashes (they crash, despite saying you "disconnected") at the end of a lot of games that hinder progress or ruin a good score you had going. I'm hoping in the future things like your SPM, K/D, and unlock progress are updated periodically through the game, rather than having that info wait to be gathered and sent to your profile at the very end of a match. A pipedream, but it would be nice to not lose EVERYTHING you worked for in a match. And, of course, squad management better be fully fleshed out on release. If it isn't simple and easy to squad up with friends, they screwed up quite possibly the biggest element of the game besides the shooting and the maps. They will never hear the end of it if the game releases without basic squad functions.

[NoScream~SPARTA~]

 

 

I haven't personally experienced any lag or hit detection problems myself, but I won't say they weren't issues for others. New server back-end, re-written netcode, all will be fixed in a matter of time. The netcode and hit detection already beat the hell out of BC2 imo. To this day there's still a good .5 - 1 second of delay before somebody drops when you shoot them on that game. That and it takes at least half a clip per enemy.

 

 

I give you this idea:

 

Every American on Sparta playing the BETA, migrated to the USA servers, stating 'they experienced too much lag' I have to say, it was bad. Many SPARTA players were saying things like " I put a whole clip into him" & "I shot him several times then he kills me with one bullet". This is not me but others, I too experienced this.

 

I personally feel the netcode is no better than BC2, problem at hand is simple:

 

Back in early 2000, Red storm made a PvP multiplayer game called 'GHOST RECON' in that game it took 1 to 2 bullets to down a man, the net-coding/ lag was the same? what happened since then?

 

CONSOLES & KIDDIE like play mechanics is what happened

 

There was no rewards or unlocks, your reward was the TEAM & SURVIVAL

Your weapons were all there at the beginning yet players played for years.

Play mechanics were the best, others that have played agree.

Co-op play was 20+ players (not 2 like DICE, whoops console limited).

PvP could be 16/32/64 like Deltaforce & Black hawk.

The mechanics encouraged you to play as a team as lone wolf you were at a disadvantage.

The terrain was pure CQB, urban & open country.

 

How do you make players respect lives in game? you remove them, no more infinite, you now have 3 lives max.

You make it so each player has limited abilities but a team 2+ has enough to make things happen.

 

 

DICE took 'battlefield' and really made a lovely looking Arcade styled console shooter with vehicles.

I have to admit, it's the most enjoyable of any....

 

But we had more 10 years ago, that's the point, we had it they took it, it's been going on for years...

All they had to do was upgrade the graphics & tools.

 

 

10 years ago your average 20 year old was '10' & still going to junior school, they never knew Ghost recon, Black hawk, Delta force, Rainbow. Yet they talk as if this is all NEW & the best....

 

Old farts had the best and wanted more, bean counters took more and gave less.......

 

The internet got faster, but games get slower.... Why?

 

Could it be that the companies hosting are flooded with other shit, where when I hosted from my house, all I had was me & 31 friends on the line.

 

it goes on and on.. the reasons BATTLEFIELD 3 could be so much more than really good, we had really good 10 years ago...

[Rooster90]

Well, like you said, BF3 is an arcade shooter and always has been. It is a very different kind of game with very different goals. There's also a lot of complex things happening in games these days compared to 10 years ago. It's not just player locations, AI, and triggers being tracked. There's tons of stat tracking logging every player's bullet being shot, the trajectory and physics behind that bullet, a random set of damage and penetration (within a certain parameter), there's vehicles moving everywhere in the air and on the ground, all high poly with physics data to track of their own. There's destruction happening on every piece of land fired upon across the whole map, wind blowing trees, and on and on. I'm certainly not giving excuses for poorly optimized net code (which they stated in their blog has been much better optimized for release already), but seriously give them a break. They may have had huge funding but nothing is ever perfect. For an arcade shooter, there's a lot of incredibly complex things being generated and sent back and forth between clients and servers. And like I said, I have not experienced any of the problems with lag or hit detection. That sucks that those in SPARTA seem to have experienced it, but I nor B-Team have at all. The only thing netcode related we saw that was negative was rubber-banding on Caspian during high-traffic times.

 

That's nice you had a game experience you really enjoyed in the past. Complain to Ubisoft who raped and murdered the Ghost Recon series. DICE had nothing to do with it. For me personally my favorite online game experience was CoD:UO, had the perfect balance of intense and tough gunplay, fast action, and vehicles that weren't overpowered, but fun to drive. I've moved on though. But honestly, what's stopping you from going back and playing Ghost Recon? Why blame the BF series, a totally unrelated franchise, for not living up to that very specific experience? It seems really odd to me you would judge BF3 negatively because it doesn't play the same as a 10 year old game you really liked. I personally found GR really boring and uninteresting. Sure, it required a lot of teamwork and was very brutal, but that's not always fun for me. I play games that are team-oriented and fun. Everyone's definition of fun is different. In pub games of BF, lives have never been of the greatest importance, it's all about team coordination to capture or destroy objectives to either kill your enemy's ticket count or to move on to the next set of objectives and reset your team's tickets. Competitive BF is a totally different game. You play with 1 or 2 very tight-knit squads keeping eachother alive and constantly having to be on top of situational awareness. Teamwork has always been a key element of winning in BF. If you have a team of lone wolves, you lose, plain and simple. Sure, some might get a great K/D, but BF has been a game where K/D means nothing and objectives and teamwork mean everything.

 

I like having unlocks and rewards in my FPS games. It gives me even more reason to keep on playing. It may be a "carrot on the stick" tool to keep me playing, but I'll be damned if it doesn't work and isn't fun for me and my buddies. Rather than handing everything to the player from the start, there's always something new to work and strive for to play with. Some people don't like it, some people do. All a matter of preference/opinion.

 

As always, I encourage fellow SPARTANS to hop on our Mumble and come play with B-Team. It might change your perspective on how much fun of a team game BF3 can really be. It truly shines when you have 2 or more full squads of coordinated friends fragging and maneuvering with eachother and absolutely dominating a server. BF3 isn't hyper tactical or hyper real, but it was never meant to be. I compare BF games to TF2 more than any other shooter, since it's a team-oriented, objective-based arcade game in a "real world" setting with classes that accomplish specific things for the team. That's all BF was and that's all it will ever be, but it is damn fun.

 

Oh, did I mention one of the maps that might be in BF3 is a remake of Omaha Beach (from 1942, set in modern time).

[Watchman~SPARTA~]

I doubt very much that Viii is blaming BF3 for the failure to be a better version of OGR, he's just adding it to the long list of games that have failed to pick up the banner since. Not one military FPS has ever come close to matching OGR, let alone advancing it. Yes, they all get shiny new gfx, different structure & maybe vehicles but that game is still the single best pc based FPS and it's 10 years old!

 

BF3 is new and so far fun, for me (and others no doubt) it has captured me the same as MW1 did, so it will be my "run & gun" fix for a while, alongside ARMA for tac-sim play.

 

I will be dissatisfied if the lag isn't fixed and I'm limited to Euro servers & miss out hooking up with guys on the other side of the pond.

[Rooster90]

There should be a filter in the server browser where you can designate what region of servers it will search. Plus, if one of your friends from the US joins a game you can join him from the Com Center (basically, your friends list, located in the lower right of Battlelog). Seems odd that you'd be region-locked since I remember playing on a few UK, French, and even Japanese servers.

 

I guess I will never find the appeal of OGR. It always felt really stale and unfinished the few times that I've played it. I enjoy me some ArmA 2 every now and then, and to me is a far superior product (despite it's many bugs). Plus it being an FPS and not even being able to see a gun on your screen? Was that just laziness on the part of Red Storm? I've always wondered that. I just don't see what's so great about OGR that ArmA 2 can't do leaps and bounds over it.

[Watchman~SPARTA~]

There should be a filter in the server browser where you can designate what region of servers it will search. Plus, if one of your friends from the US joins a game you can join him from the Com Center (basically, your friends list, located in the lower right of Battlelog). Seems odd that you'd be region-locked since I remember playing on a few UK, French, and even Japanese servers.

 

I think you've misunderstood me or I haven't explained clearly.

The region option worked fine but anything other than Euro based lagged to the point of being not worth playing. So I stuck with Euro servers only, playing happily on UK, German, French etc.

Even US servers with pings in the low 100's were unplayable and I regularly play on the US ARMA server at pings well above this.

Hopefully it is sorted for release.

[MedicSN6]

All I have to say is that you should BE ADVISED.

 

[EMT~SPARTA~]

Be advised medic, I am advising you to be advised.

Edited October 10, 2011 by EMT~SPARTA~

[MedicSN6]

Be advised medic, I am advising you to be advised.

 

Be advised EMT, I consider myself to be advised of your advisory advice.

[CoBoL~SPARTA~]

I miss the Beta DOH.

[EMT~SPARTA~]

Be advised EMT, I consider myself to be advised of your advisory advice.

 

 

I lol'd

[Gunthar~SPARTA~]

My problem with BF3 is the perception that anything has changed. BF1942 had the exact same structure of game play with the best graphics and physics around at the time. Since then very little has changed in the series, except for 2142 which in my opinion moved the game away from the comfortable setting and actually advanced the game play a little. Today you have 4 classes which are almost identical as the ones that were there in the first game. The only thing that has changed to me from BFBC2 is the graphics, ragdoll physics, the ability to go prone, and the increase in destructible environment. To me this is like putting a $5000 paint job on a Gremlin, yea it looks frigging awsome but undernieth that its still a turd on wheels.

 

Other than these things it plays almost the same as BC2 with the same issues.

Gaming has stagnated to a rehash of the same tired game play with pretty new graphics there has been very little if any advancement in FPS game play since COD MW1. In that time we have seen game prices go up $10, paying for additional content at rediculous prices, reduction in replay value, twitch gaming moving to the front ahead of strategy, and games constantly get dumbed down to appeal to the console player base which has diminished the PC FPS player to the level of a caveman with a stick. I own a console and use it to play sports games and others that are best played on that type of product. The FPS crowd on the console have really, in my opinion, killed the FPS market on PC if you require an auto aim in order to kill someone then you need to reevaluate your game.

 

While BF3 is going to be a really good game it is still the same tired play as the rest of the FPS market, the only FPS that will change this stance in the future will be Arma 3.

 

I decided about 15 minutes into the BF3 beta that I will not spend my money on this game as I can find many different uses for 60 bucks than to beat my head against a wall, the random moments of fun do not outweigh the grind of annoyance.

[Denny]

Very informative thread. It seems the there's alot of problems with the game,

while at the same time its getting some great praise.

I value your opinions.

[NoScream~SPARTA~]

The game is fun, alot of fun, but the type of fun becomes repetitive in the sense that it does not make you do much different. The main differences are you get more kit as you score more points, kills are a side line to most (Except snipers), for most players, the objective is key but the game seems to funnel the play into two categories.

 

Those that realize the aim is the objective & those that go for kills.

 

Now like alot of other FPS, the console era has brought the quick kill, instant gratification world to FPS, so the tactical element of reducing the enemies numbers is not important, as most use re-spawn so it's self defeatist to assume you can reduce enemies by kills.

 

The other point is how the enemy is killed, not by the variety of weapons but by the hit/ damage modelling, there seems to be an over simplification of this, to the point where most kills require multiple hits, wounding is mute as all it does in modern shooters is reduce health.

 

Back in the day of real Tactical FPS games, The player count ( enemies) depleted so you faced less as the round progressed & secondly the wounding model of health was more distinctive in that a hit to the arm or leg would result in incapacities in aim or ability to move (to a degree).

 

I find all this missing in BF3, not that it was part of BF2, but I was expecting progression in the ideas...

 

 

We have what we have, a game that struggles to get players to play happily over distances & one that continues to have simplified modelling of mechanics...

 

The old mechanics made you play differently, you had to be tactical as your chance of suffering a wound let alone a kill were greater as the respawn was limited and playing with a limp or inability to aim steadily would reduce your chances of success....

 

 

I liked the old system, but modern players seem to want the new way....

[Watchman~SPARTA~]

The old mechanics made you play differently, you had to be tactical as your chance of suffering a wound let alone a kill were greater as the respawn was limited and playing with a limp or inability to aim steadily would reduce your chances of success....

 

 

I liked the old system, but modern players seem to want the new way....

 

This.

 

I have fond memories of crawling the full width of the Caves map, with a gimped leg. It never put me off in fact it made my like for the game all the more. I'm glad that Arma gives me close to this type of experience, it satisfies my tactical yearnings.

[Batwing~SPARTA~]

Tough to say.

 

In my opinion this Beta experience didn t give the right taste of the game. I want to stay positive because otherwise too many questions would raise... and I might not like the answers.

 

Why should they put oout an outdated Beta showing several inconsistencies? Either they didn t know the inconsistencies, or they just needed an "engine" out there to stress the netcode, or they preferred to put out a way incomplete beta to prevent hacking manipulation upfront.. or who knows what.

 

What I know is the experience was weird. Good but not great and incomplete. But hey that s what a Beta is !!

 

After that, beyond a purely Tech aspect, how the game is supposed to be an enjoyment only belongs to how players will play it.

 

Also the most amazing game can be ruined by the wrong crowd and just to pull an example, not even Arma is immune to this. I played on other servers when Sparta was down and my experience was not that good. People makes the difference.

 

Especially on large servers with 64 players on open environment - not a controlled tournament or specific rules applied - it will be an ongoing fun / frustration, but I don t think the game is the culprit. it s just a sandbox leaving the opportunity to be played the way ppl feels like.

 

About innovations in BF3 - well this is an old style of gaming. I don t think from this kind of FPSs we can treally expect any revolutionary change on the table. however there are innovations. If they are gonna be succesful, time will tell.

1 - Web browser based UI

2 - Graphic - it is outstanding

3 - Sound - it is immersive

4 - Animations - there is a new engine, it has to be good at something, right?

 

So, it s another FPS with something new. We will play it and we will love it or hate it as usually works on this kind of games.

 

To me, what really is amazing about this game is the ENORMOUS MARKETING behind it. All of the buzzing perfectly worked. it will be up to the buzzing is another story, but the money will be already rolling and that is what it counts ;) IT S BIZNESS BROS ;)

[Watchman~SPARTA~]

One of the aspects that I am looking forward to is the adoptaion of a "crouch only" type of server. This worked fantastically well on MW1, with Sparta, BPR and others coming over from GRnet. If we can get that working again then for me we can get the exeprience we want from BF3.

Supplement that with regular server setups and I'll play till it loses the mass appeal.

[MedicSN6]

This.

 

I have fond memories of crawling the full width of the Caves map, with a gimped leg. It never put me off in fact it made my like for the game all the more. I'm glad that Arma gives me close to this type of experience, it satisfies my tactical yearnings.

 

Remember the dancing bear? Wheres the dancing bear in BF3. That's right, there isn't one. No dancing bear, no pre-order. Simple as that.

[Rooster90]

@Gunthar: u mad bro? XD jk, but I wouldn't want BF any other way. I have other games for more mil-sim/tactical play. I want my BF game to be a BF game. However, our team has been discussing what 2142 be like in the new engine.... drool. Like it or not, twitch gameplay will always rule the FPS world, always has since Counter-Strike/Quake. It's where the money and tournaments are as well as the largest audience. No offense, but a very select audience would actually watch a tournament in ArmA 2. Definitely looking forward to the competitive scene in BF3 though, B-Team will be in as many major ladders as we can be. We'll also be hosting some open tournaments of our own (likely an entrance fee as well, 5 bucks tops). We're waiting to see what our income for this month will be from livestreaming, as we will be giving away a free BF3 Limited Edition with that money and the tournament winner.

 

@Batwing: There's one word that sums up why they sent out a month old version: consoles. The reason it was a month old is because that's when they sent in the software and paperwork to Sony and Microsoft for them to approve the Beta on their systems. It was mostly Microsoft's fault, since the amount of red tape in their approval process literally took them over a month to pass that version of the beta. In that time, DICE made a ton of fixes that couldn't be applied. The game's code also had to be chopped up for consoles to be able to reasonably download (which causes unforeseen problems in and of itself). And within that license agreement, DICE likely couldn't send out new clients or updates (to any platform), lest consoles had to re-download everything and would have to be re-approved by Microsoft and Sony.

[Hajimoto]

I thoroughly enjoyed the BETA. I made sure that I went into the BETA with my mind clear of expectations as it is unfair to expect the publisher to release a 100% polished game for testing purposes. The maps that were given for testing allowed for close quarters urban scenarios to happen and later the Caspian Border Map allowed the graphics engine a chance to stretch its arms and show what it could do. I own every PC version of the Battlefield series and in my opinion BF3 has taken the largest step forward of any previous BF release, thanks in part to MOH. When I played BF3 BETA I felt a perfect blend of BFBC2 and MOH in the title and I would like to point out the highlights and lowlights of my BETA experience.

 

Highlights

• Graphically stunning.
• Quick load times.
• Physics felt right (Avatars movement, speed and gravity felt correct in the world).
• Quick Web interface (reminiscent of Quake LIVE).
• Ability to utilize the Origin front end while in game (SHIFT-F1).
• Class balance appeared to be equal at low to mid levels.
• Loads of toys and add-ons to help customize load outs to the users play style.
• Situational awareness cues clear and un-cluttered.
• Overall fun environment considering it is a BETA.

 

Lowlights

• Graphical glitches that allowed fall through the floor instances.
• Weird graphical anatomic disfigurement of other players.
• Non-responsive medic revive paddles. Appeared to have a small register box at times.
• Death timer is far too short. Dead player should be able to release if they choose to after 5 secs not forced release.
• Huge discrepancies in weapon damage, was being exploited in BETA and may be an issue in retail release.
• Ability to bust concrete knee walls with ammo pack or med kit deployment if tossed down to close to the wall.
• 15 days until I get to play again!

Most of the other issues that I felt were an annoyance I did not list as they are slated to be corrected in the retail release as explained below.

 

Edited October 10, 2011 by Hajimoto

[Halli~SPARTA~]

1. It's Battlefield

 

2. I had no lag on UK servers

 

3. Ran fine with a 775 Q9505 socket and used 90% of all cores to include GPU at 70% up

 

4. It's Battlefield

 

5. Ready for Game release because it's not Arma3 release it's a Battlefield release

 

6. Waiting for ArmA3 Release and this will tide me over till then.

 

7. SPARTA will host Servers. If we have available settings we will have Tac days or a second server for Tac.

 

[Donziboy2]

Hmmm...

 

Bad thing is I game with another group on BF games so I will be divided......

 

Good news is that im pretty sure with 2 active groups there will always be somebody up for some fun