Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

BF3 vs BFBC2 - Page 2

Last response: in Video Games
Share
July 3, 2011 10:07:53 PM

I have always enjoyed COD games over BF or BC games (just my opinion) but I also agree that BF3 will completely demolish MW3 but I'm sure I'll still enjoy MW3 but my play time more than likely will be heavily favored to BF3.
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 6:43:29 PM

MisterQ29 said:
I sense the fear over the specs required to play this game with every setting maxxed out but calm down people, really?

If "no current hardware could ever play it at full settings on launch day" how were EA able to show it off at E3 on a PC?

Secondly, why would EA/DICE make a game that only 3% of PC owners could play at max settings? Simple answer is that they wouldn't.

BF3 is going to be the 'show off' game to have on your gaming rig for the next year at most, before something even more power-hungry comes along to take it's crown. Crysis 3 or even Duke Nukem Forever 2!?! Hehe :-)

Well they could and might. If they could make the game look great on say 75% settings with 40+ FPS on a decent rig then FULL settings might not be reachable for most but as things progress more people could run it at max settings. Isn't that basically what Crysis did? When Crysis first came out how manny PC's could max everything out at 1080p with 8x AA and all things up as high as they could go?
m
0
l
Related resources
July 7, 2011 6:50:37 PM

trogdor796 said:
Really? Because when I look at this game, it looks nothing like BF2 or 2142. It looks much more like the Bad Company series. Which is fail. They said it is supposed to be a direct sequel, but the way they are marketing it and showing it, it doesn't look like that at all. BF2 had a commander in multi-player. Does BF3? Nope. BF2/any true battlefield game(all except Bad Company 1 and 2) was muli-player only/no single-player. Yet they are wasting time with a single-player story for BF3 that will most likely suck just like the ones in both bad company games and their new Medal of Honor did. I simply do not understand why they would bother. Almost all shooter campaigns suck. Nobody buys a shooter for the sp. How people think this game looks like a true sequel and not another Bad Company is beyond me. Btw, I own BF2, 2142, and both Bad Company games. My brother owns 1942 and Vietnam. So I have experience with all of them.

I play single player shooters so Im sure others do. I dont pay full price and wait for the games to get cheaper and then buy them and play the single player modes :)  . Why...because I dont like how a lot of players will belittle you if you are not good at the mutiplayer game. If your new to multiplayer shooters how do you get good you practice right? Well I dont have the time some people do to play for hours and dont like logging on and getting destroyed by some 12 year old on summer break then getting trash talked by teammates for being a noob lol. So I play the single player mode :) 
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 6:53:21 PM

trogdor796 said:
I appreciate the single player if it's good. But the sp for BC1 and BC2 sucked, most will agree. And if you think there needs to be a sp in Battlefield you are playing the wrong kind of game. They are spending time that could have been used to perfect the multi player. Are you saying you honestly want Singleplayer in BF3? You didn't have it BF2 or any other true battlefield game, why is it in this one? I don't get why people are fine with them adding single player. It's stupid.

So what kind of game should I play then if I want a single player game? Am I not supposed to play shooters or only play the space alien ones? Are you saying any shooter that is trying to be some what realistic should not have a single player mode? I dont get why you would be so aggens a single player mode if you dont like it dont play it.
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 10:57:35 PM

cburke82 said:
So what kind of game should I play then if I want a single player game? Am I not supposed to play shooters or only play the space alien ones? Are you saying any shooter that is trying to be some what realistic should not have a single player mode? I dont get why you would be so aggens a single player mode if you dont like it dont play it.

I agree
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 11:23:29 PM

cburke82 said:
So what kind of game should I play then if I want a single player game? Am I not supposed to play shooters or only play the space alien ones? Are you saying any shooter that is trying to be some what realistic should not have a single player mode? I dont get why you would be so aggens a single player mode if you dont like it dont play it.

+ 1 jillion
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 11:31:22 PM

jeremy1183 said:
I agree

all of us single player loving hippies should still be playing doom I guess lol
m
0
l
July 7, 2011 11:51:48 PM

I'm saying that a franchise that has no true history of single player doesn't need it added in for the latest instalment. There are many good shooters out there that are Single player, like the stalker series for example. I just feel the multiplayer won't be as good because they are spending un-needed time with a single player campaign that true battlefield fans/vets won't care to play anyways. I'm just curious, all of you thinking the single player looks cool and you want to play it, have you owned any other battlfield game(Bad Company 1 and 2 DOES NOT count) or will this be your first one?
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 12:03:11 AM

trogdor796 said:
I'm saying that a franchise that has no true history of single player doesn't need it added in for the latest instalment. There are many good shooters out there that are Single player, like the stalker series for example. I just feel the multiplayer won't be as good because they are spending un-needed time with a single player campaign that true battlefield fans/vets won't care to play anyways. I'm just curious, all of you thinking the single player looks cool and you want to play it, have you owned any other battlfield game(Bad Company 1 and 2 DOES NOT count) or will this be your first one?

well if BC2 does not count then I have not owned one, but I will say IMO BC2 single player was the best one in a shooter for some time. Crysis was weak for SP mode after the first play and so was Metro and any COD game I have played ( Have not played COD:BO its far to expensive for me for now lol)

Side note here: Im trying to play BC2 Multiplayer and only see 3 servers and its the steam version. All 3 seem to stay empty or close to it and I cant seem to locate any search featchers. Feel free to call me a noob if im over looking some insanly easy fix lol.
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 12:06:04 AM

::sigh:: I'm sure there are many many fanboy websites out there for the hardcore BF multi junkies as yourself to go complain about how bad its gonna suck based on nothing but speculative accusations. Lighten up man, you know youre going to buy it anyhow. Sounds to me you are the only one in this thread spitting fire about it. There are alot of people that got into Battlefield games with bad company 1 and 2. That doesnt negate their opinions or hopes of a good single player just because they never played the original games. Be glad DICE at least has the intention of making it a PC worthy installment after their last 2 games.
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 12:15:37 AM

FlintIronStagg said:
::sigh:: I'm sure there are many many fanboy websites out there for the hardcore BF multi junkies as yourself to go complain about how bad its gonna suck based on nothing but speculative accusations. Lighten up man, you know youre going to buy it anyhow. Sounds to me you are the only one in this thread spitting fire about it. There are alot of people that got into Battlefield games with bad company 1 and 2. That doesnt negate their opinions or hopes of a good single player just because they never played the original games. Be glad DICE at least has the intention of making it a PC worthy installment after their last 2 games.

+1
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 12:20:34 AM

I own BF2+expansions, BF2142, BC2 +Vietnam, I happened to like the sp in BC2 as well, it was a nice diversion for a few hours
Im glad they are adding a sp to BF3 , if the servers happen to crap out on day 1 it will give me something else to do.
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 12:47:12 AM

I actually wouldn't be surprised if the servers went out day one...they've built up a good reputation for stuff like that lol.
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 7:06:49 AM

dont feed the troll
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 7:15:57 AM

Trolls need exactly what they deserve to eat - *** sandwiches
m
0
l
July 8, 2011 7:54:17 PM

trogdor796 said:
I'm saying that a franchise that has no true history of single player doesn't need it added in for the latest instalment. There are many good shooters out there that are Single player, like the stalker series for example. I just feel the multiplayer won't be as good because they are spending un-needed time with a single player campaign that true battlefield fans/vets won't care to play anyways. I'm just curious, all of you thinking the single player looks cool and you want to play it, have you owned any other battlfield game(Bad Company 1 and 2 DOES NOT count) or will this be your first one?


I totally understand why people want a single player campaign...I'll probably play it when it comes out. But the true heart of the Battlefield franchise is the Multiplayer. BF2 had no single play campaign but remains as one of the best games I've ever played. The Battefield series started very early with the whole "may the best TEAM win" which is its strengh (as oppose to COD where "may the best MAN win". It plays very differently.

So to come from a background where all the mechanics are built on "how can you help your team" to "lets create a single player campaign" just doesn't feel like a true Battlefield game (for those of us that have been playing the game from the beginning). Not to say the SP campaign will suck...i'm looking forward to it. Still, it's that gut feeling we get (especially seeing how Bad Company series steered of BF2).

So, I'll support this guy because I kind'of feel the same way.
m
0
l
July 9, 2011 1:48:04 AM

I'm not saying the game is automatically going to suck. In fact, I hope that it turns out good even with the single player. I am simply CONCERNED of neglected multi player due to time spent on a single player. I feel that after the direction BC1 and BC2 went I hve the right to be concerned. Call me a troll if you want, I'm simply expressing my opinion on a topic with reasoning, which is what a forum is for last time I checked.
m
0
l
July 9, 2011 2:24:22 AM

I see what you are saying. I play FPS shooter games just for the MP only. It;s usually about 6 months later I'll even look at the SP....I don't think there is much need to concern yourself over a neglected MP due to how long they have been working on the game....but you never know...they may have spend to much time on the SP...needless to say I'm pretty sure it will meet most if not all players expectations.
m
0
l
July 9, 2011 3:09:38 PM

mp only games are poor at best. even when you use them with bots the bf games get tedious quick...
a good single player will bring more gamers onboard as it really does do the ground work of the multiplayer... it gives you the back story of the game as a whole so makes the overall game richer.
i really hope they dont do a bc2 and just release 6 maps and claim the rest are dlc that can only be unlocked after a few weeks... bc2 really was a let down in that respect. we want at least 16 different maps where most if not all game types can be played. and the maps better be huge if theres gonna be 64 players out the box.
m
0
l
July 9, 2011 3:52:34 PM

bf3's going to be released on november right ?
well, we don't know much about the plots about bf3 apart from that it's a direct sequel of bc2. we don't know if the single players's going to be great or bad. moh2010 was a serious letdown for me since i only play sp and not mp which is different becuase mp was the good part in it.
m
0
l
July 9, 2011 4:28:28 PM

I didn't see what everyone hated about the new moh. I thought it was a really fun game online. I'm pretty sure bf3 is going to be fun, i enjoyed playing through bad company's sp and still to this day enjoy playing it's mp.
m
0
l
July 9, 2011 5:22:52 PM

Gman450 said:
bf3's going to be released on november right ?
well, we don't know much about the plots about bf3 apart from that it's a direct sequel of bc2. we don't know if the single players's going to be great or bad. moh2010 was a serious letdown for me since i only play sp and not mp which is different becuase mp was the good part in it.

October 25th is the release date.
m
0
l
July 10, 2011 2:15:40 AM

Specs have not been released...only speculation/guestaments of the specs are being posted...
m
0
l
July 10, 2011 2:23:38 AM

So that means gamestop was just guessing the specs?...
m
0
l
July 10, 2011 2:34:15 AM

post the so called specs please (copy&paste)...my browser wont show it for some reason
m
0
l
July 10, 2011 3:40:42 AM

Quote:
Home > News > Battlefield 3 system requirements revealed
Battlefield 3 system requirements revealed
Owen Hill at 02:49pm July 8 2011
Comments 131
Battlefield 3 Thumbnail

VG247 report that GameStop have listed system specifications for Battlefield 3. These aren’t an official announcement from DICE so we can’t confirm the required rig, yet, though we have contacted EA to verify the specs. Still worth a peek though eh?
Minimum

Hard Drive Space: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version
OS: Windows Vista or Windows 7
Processor: Core 2 Duo @ 2.0GHzRAM2GB
Video Card: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible Nvidia or AMD ATI card


Recommended

Hard Drive Space: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version
OS: Windows 7 64-bit
Processor: Quad-core Intel or AMD CPURAM 4GB
Video Card: DirectX 11 Nvidia or AMD ATI card, GeForce GTX 460, Radeon Radeon HD 6850
m
0
l
July 10, 2011 5:02:02 AM

Well if the 460/Quad (even though it doesnt state a speed) part makes it to the official system specs when EA/DICE releases them then I believe most people should have no problem playing it. Only time will tell.
m
0
l
July 10, 2011 5:18:26 AM

thanks for correcting me. Its been a long time since i had been updtaed with the bf3 news.
m
0
l
July 11, 2011 5:28:22 PM

zookeeper525 said:
So that means gamestop was just guessing the specs?...


[lol] Don't listen to anything they say. The general employee at gamestop is either:
A) virgin living in mom's basement who frequents WoW
B) believes he/she knows all there is to know about technology and anyone who says otherwise is wrong
C) owns a Wii
m
0
l
July 11, 2011 5:35:47 PM

Quote:
mp only games are poor at best. even when you use them with bots the bf games get tedious quick...


Thats the point: BF was ALWAYS multi-only until BC/BC2. Theres a reason why BF2 [and its mods] still have thousands of players.

As for map sizes, you've apparently never played a 64-man BF2 map. :p 
m
0
l
July 11, 2011 6:50:11 PM

if you are thinkg of getting bf3, you only need to ask yourself one question.
Do i like being vehicle spawn raped by fighter jets?
If yes, go for it
If no, don't get it.

I just don't see this game being very much fun. There will be absolutely no point in playing if you are not in a vehicle. Due to the over abundance of proning ghillied snipers and choppers and jets endlessly strafing the sky. You can say " thats what target locking at's are for" all you want, lets see you try to hit a jet with a combustion fueled rocket, it aint happening.
m
0
l
July 11, 2011 7:28:53 PM

DX10/DX11 is a shocker to me. Tons of people still gaming on XP machines that won't be buying this game.
m
0
l
July 11, 2011 9:15:47 PM

isnt xp close to a decade old? if not over a decade old ?
its a good os but change happens.
m
0
l
July 11, 2011 9:54:36 PM

benski said:
DX10/DX11 is a shocker to me. Tons of people still gaming on XP machines that won't be buying this game.

I guess its good for the XP users that they got that much use out of an OS. Think of it from the world of consoles, 5 years on average of games followed buy a complete cutoff of all development. You want more games buy the next console. I think taking xp out of the mix should translate into better quality games for the PC. Basicly its one less step needed to bring a PC game to market thus giving them a bit more time to make sure the game is done right. Every OS will go this way sooner or later, XP users are just lucky Vista sucked so bad thus making XP a better choice even after a new OS came out :) .
m
0
l
July 12, 2011 3:19:51 AM

cburke82 said:
I guess its good for the XP users that they got that much use out of an OS. Think of it from the world of consoles, 5 years on average of games followed buy a complete cutoff of all development. You want more games buy the next console. I think taking xp out of the mix should translate into better quality games for the PC. Basicly its one less step needed to bring a PC game to market thus giving them a bit more time to make sure the game is done right. Every OS will go this way sooner or later, XP users are just lucky Vista sucked so bad thus making XP a better choice even after a new OS came out :) .

+1 Jillion
m
0
l
July 12, 2011 3:38:15 PM

Had to reply wooodoggies re spawnrape via jets.
In BF2 your carrier spawn had AA guns, they were good. If you played MEC your base had aa guns, they were good too.
There are also other jets that can take them down. In BF2 you had a bomber and a dogfighter. Dogfighter kills bomber = happy days.
If your team is being demolished by planes, back your team up! Jump on the AA emplacements and take em out. It's a "team game" if everyone tries to lone wolf it COD styleee then your team will DIAF.
I wouldn't be suprised to also see an aa missile launcher as an option to replace your rpg, (battlefield vietnam anyone?)
BF2 Maps were also Huuuuge, so if your team is getting smashed, jump in a fast vehicle and sneak across the map, there are a million options when you have a nice expansive map.
m
0
l
July 17, 2011 12:03:36 PM

KingOtaku said:
Of course many people are going to buy Battlefield 3. I played BF2 AND Bad Company 2, and while both had a different feel, they were both good for their own reasons. Either way, BF3 will blow MW3 out of the water. And personally, I enjoyed the BC2 campaign, and felt thoroughly compelled to beat it on hard.
As for graphics, c'mon people. They've been making the game since BF2, and they have stated how optimized it is. I think there's no cause for worry.
And even if the game at e3 wasn't maxed out, those graphics still (in my opinion) give crysis a run for it's money.


I say that today's enthusiast-level hardware should be able to max it out with decent frame rates.
m
0
l
July 17, 2011 1:40:49 PM

I love how Crysis is the game we all benchmark to:) 

Such a great looking game but i also think we are underestimating BF3 under the hood just because its going from version 1.5 to 2.0 doesn't mean it will be a cake walk to run at MAX,

I bet it it will bring our rigs to its knees, just like Crysis did back in the day:) 
m
0
l
July 17, 2011 3:27:22 PM

rivo101 said:
I love how Crysis is the game we all benchmark to:) 

Such a great looking game but i also think we are underestimating BF3 under the hood just because its going from version 1.5 to 2.0 doesn't mean it will be a cake walk to run at MAX,

I bet it it will bring our rigs to its knees, just like Crysis did back in the day:) 


The new 28nm next-gen graphics cards from ATI and Nvidia are just around the corner. We'll see how they handle BF3 as well as other demanding titles.
m
0
l
July 17, 2011 9:40:26 PM

When are those supposed to be released? (next gen cards)
m
0
l
July 17, 2011 10:49:42 PM

gamerk316 said:
I'll say it again: I fully expect BF3 to be this generations Crysis. I expect to see CPU bottlenecks, and I'm interested to see how big a hit enabling Tesselation brings...

You'll be able to play, but I doubt any current rig could max BF3 at laucnh...


You're talking about two completely different engines. The new Frostbite engine is made to scale incredibly well to most systems, unlike the engine that the original Crysis was running (Cryengine 2 I believe). I can understand how you may think that, but I don't foresee the same issues that you do based on what we've seen from DICE over the years. They know how to make a great engine.
m
0
l
July 19, 2011 9:35:55 AM

Sigh, I cant find my bf2 install disks any more, I miss kubra dam. Can I fit a bomber through the tunnel under the dam, no i cant. Bang! I love kubra! Loop the looping a chopper through the dam structure is quite fun as well ^^
m
0
l
October 28, 2011 8:49:47 AM

Repost because I do not see submitted comment displaying. Use this one if the other one is lagged.

I am running Battlefield 3 on Medium / High default settings. I am not getting 60 fps constant with High default settings at 1920x1080. I almost prefer medium to get the stable high framerate. I am using 3.5 i7, 1600 Ram, 6970's in crossfire (4 GB total) 10.9 drivers

I just wanted to contribute. thanks...

-Douglas Rochford
m
0
l
      • 1
      • 2 / 2
!