BATTLEFIELD 3 BETA a disaster?

There's hundreds of full servers?

Far from it, on pc and playing Caspian Border this weekend, amazing.

I've played it for 13H20M total, that's more than I've played some full price games. There are some issues with it, bugs and hackers et cetera, but as it's a beta that is to be expected.

Just take one look at the leader boards for the crazy amount of hackers, I dropped into a server earlier and some asshat hacked it so that the only spawn point was directly in front of his machine gun. He had about 50 kills and 0 deaths, it didn't take long for the server to empty.

Not at all, Caspian Border over the weekend on PC kept me well entertained - played engineer with the various kit combinations to either go tank or jet hunting, tank repairing/support, laying mines, sneaking around the foliage near bases capturing flags, sniping / spotting from on top of a few hills overlooking bases, zipping around in C4 jihad jeeps, defending flags as the enemy approached by setting up a nice kill zone (defending a flag does not equate to camping), all-in-all a typical BF experience, with only a few bugs, certainly a lot less than in Metro. Reminded me that Conquest is where it's at really, although I also enjoyed Rush on BC2 better. When the squad system is sorted, this game should really shine.

Some folks just can't be pleased, remember this was only a BETA not a DEMO and was primarily being used by Dice to stress-test the servers (64 v 64 worked quite well too). If you all want to return to COD, then be my guest.

Alright folks here's my two cents, and this is coming from someone who played the Battlefield games to death and loved every minute.

I don't think this game feels good at all, I know it's not a continuation of the Bad Company series but it's a million miles away from what is the best multiplayer game going. I can't put my finger on what exactly makes this a bit of a failure for me but it just doesn't feel any fun to play (and I know some of you will retort "in real life it wouldn't take a full clip to kill you) but it's not the damage system that I hate, you can adapt to things like that.

Every thing just seems off, but perhaps the most worrying thing, for me at least, is that it if you think your games in bad shape you don't hold an open beta this close to release or you risk a sizeable amount of sales, you only should hold an open beta if you're sure you're close to a finished product. And well if DICE thinks this is in good shape they're wrong, and even if they do manage to release a product with all the bugs fixed and no need for a week 1 patch, then I still don't think the game will be anywhere near the world beater EA have pumped it to be. I'd love to be proven wrong but for me I think EA/DICE have encountered more problems than they forseen and are going to end up rushing this game a little bit just because they can't back down from the MW3 fight now.

TheFairy wrote: »

Adamcp898 you playing on PC or Console? Theres a serious difference TBH! The game is made for PC, they put it first for the developement rights, and well its paid off!

Granted I'm playing on my 360, all my PC/Laptop are good for these days is running games not much higher than BF2 , and I am painfully aware that a keyboard/mouse is much better for FPS games.

They can put the PC first all they want, and it's nice of them to continue the Battlefield franchise as a PC franchise but even if this is simply a port on console, it's still a long way off the mark, there are genuinely games for me with far less hype and budget that are better than this beta.

I know the fact that I've said I'm playing this on console will mean that a lot of you will ignore my previous points, but, and I do hope I'm proven wrong come the end of the month, there really is going to be only one winner in the COD/BF3 battle right now for most people I imagine. I'm not planning on buying MW3, but this battle will be decided in terms of sales and that means winning the casual gamer market, the gamer who just wants to sit down and have some fun, and right now as much of a rehash it only is every year, COD will still give you the most fun.

beta now closed

will write up my thoughts when I get time. Now I got to go to dentist...

Played on my pc (quad correct, 4gb ram, 570gtx phantom OC) and on the 360.

Both felt a bit weak. I felt no immersion. caspian felt great but it's such a loan wolf game. Everyone wants a vehicle and if your left on foot it's just a bit yawn.

My only reason for wanting mw3 is for the balancing that's been done to mp. The features of elite which heavily promote clan gaming and a deep, rich mp experience that will see team play rewarded. I could care less about graphics folks, I still play counter strike.

I want to feel quality in my gaming, I don't want to have to consider things like (hhmmm should that shot have killed him, I'm pretty sure it was spot on....ah well,this game looks great..) I even had that feeling with battlefield 2 on pc. Hit registration was a bit wanky at the best of times.

Either way we all have choices, I think the bf3 community will be very happy and will over look the bugs and short comings of a premature title that screams for developer attention. And mw3 will be the same old game with a few new bits and pieces, but it works and has a mp focus like no other game with the elite service.

So we'll see what we're all still playing in a year from now, fact is I still play mw2, couldn't care less about black ops, ****ty developer just like cod 3 and world at war.

back on topic...

I'd call BF3 a communications fubar. Wouldnt call the beta itself a disaster. I think so many of the new features caught players by surprise, most of all battlelog.

But not least because of Caspian Boarder I feel PC gamers have warmed up to it a lot more then console players. More impressive though then caspian is that the beta went on to somewhat prove on a technical level that battlelog works as a platform for bf3 as they were able to update features and functions on the fly without the need of a patch.

Similarly the the problems the game itself, the ground clipping and other game breaking issues disappeared for me during the beta, showing that a lot of the issues were server side issues.

By the last night of the beta I was playing hours of Caspian boarder without crashing or major graphical issues (sometimes that strange screen flicker but it was rare), so clearly despite complaints the game was being tweaked quite rapidly.

I dont know what the process is on consoles, why they couldnt (or if they possibly did) update their servers to improve stability like the pc ones.

Overall the game warmed up to me very quickly. I know some issues remain, but its nowhere near as terrifyingly broken as it seemed at the beginning of the beta.


On the issues of actual gameplay.

I like the weapons, I think they feel right, I like the gameplay, Rush has always been more focused and intense then conquest, I like how metro varies the environment. I would say the UMP-45 is a bit overpowered, I'd say the same for the pp-2000 and PDWR except they both have tiny magazines. It's one of the few games I have genuinely enjoyed sniping. I think the remix of the assault and support classes works, we no longer have arnie like medics dominating games like in BC2 and the assault does not feel as useless as he did then either. If I had one complaint it would be he does feel a bit weak in conquest still due to high number of vehicles and the engie gets overplayed here.

Vehicles I enjoyed what I got my hands on, I love the tanks, though they havnt changed much beyond the bc2 icarnates, but being able to customize them on multiple levels is more depth then expected. Similarly the jets, I know they got a lot of flak, but they are not your BF2 jets, the metagame for them has completely changed. I will admit they've been nerfed hard and there is a huge initial steep learning curve coupled with a lack of opportunity targets, but like the tanks they have a surprising amount of depth with their unlocks. helicopters feel like the weak link to me, they lack the dexterity to survive stingers or jets. I've seen other players use them as flying AA platforms effectively, but I never got the hang of them even in the manner of controlling them. If I had one complaint about vehicles its that I feel at the moment if one team ignored their jets and let the other team arse around in their own, they'd win by advantage because jets are not making a big enough impact at the moment on the actual battle.

PS3 player here

Well guys, now that the Beta is closed I am wondering what ye all thought of the game thus far? I have a long post on my initial impressions somewhere else here so I am not going to bore you solid (once again) with such a long one.

In summary I think it is an amazing game, I played over 15-16 hours on Metro and still not bored. I've unlocked the UMP which helped and am loving the SVD or MOD11 with the Holographic sight, quickly started kicking ass with that kit.

I LOVE the mobile spawn point, it is a pity the plebs you end up with don't understand it. This means I am recon more than I would like but it essential to have a M.S.P. otherwise you will spawn on teammates and give away their position (fair annoying)

Whether you play stealthy or all action gunning the game delivers... ended up playing a lot better towards the end cos I was crap at first.

One gripe is that the UMP is on all kits so I reckon that will be used to death cos it is basically an animal of a gun. Another is that I can't get the handle of the earlier Assault Class guns (unlocked M416 but only played if for 2 mins) as they seem to have serious kickback.

The suppression sound feature is brilliant and I LOVE the tactical lights.



Overall 9.5/10 for me irrespective of bugs and debate over graphics.

There's a lot of things I don't WANT to do in cod. I don't want to pilot a jet or a challenger 2. It's not fitting. That'd be like saying you can't use pistols in quake 3. Yeah I know, I don't want to.

The tactical light is an absolute joke and not something that is deployed equipment in any modern conflict. It also seems to work out doors, which means this pocket light is BRIGHTER THAN THE SUN!!! Again a complete joke.

Ah so much wrong with this game but when the full version comes out at least it will show people what's really up.

The tactical light is an absolute joke and not something that is deployed equipment in any modern conflict. It also seems to work out doors, which means this pocket light is BRIGHTER THAN THE SUN!!! Again a complete joke.

I think someone showed a video on a thread elsewhere here that a tactical light that the military use is actually a seriously powerful piece of kit. Its not a pocket light in the way you are thinking.

here's the video: http://youtu.be/NiKzrnKR3Ts

BlastedGlute wrote: »

I didnt say there isnt lights brighter than the sun,my flash unit for my camera are, my point is that no troop would be issued with a light so bright that 1 it would act as glaring combat indicator to opposing forces and a units position on a battlefield, secondly it could give you third degree burns if it faced the wrong way for a few seconds and thirdly you could visually disable half of your fire team if you turned around for a second, rendering your team pretty useless. It's a seriously overpowered addition to a game like this and in no way holds continuity with modern conflict.

1. If someone wants to use a tactical light outdoors and it gives away their position, then that's their look-out.

2. A tactical light has a very high lumen output with minimal heat emitted, no-one will get burnt .

3. Use the off switch as required. Tactical lights are just another weapon attachment that may suit indoor or night maps, people have been overusing them in the beta because they are novel, this will change upon release of the full game.