Read more.Quote:
Wants you to pre-order Medal of Honor: Warfighter in order to gain exclusive access.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Wants you to pre-order Medal of Honor: Warfighter in order to gain exclusive access.
I wouldn't buy MoH anyway, but $70?! Seriously?! Sounds as though they're trying to charge players twice for BF4!
RIP battlefield, EA suck the life out of all the best games/franchise's. BF4 will be rushed out to beat MW4 to market as was BF3 to beat MW3, the obligatory beta in September to for-fill the MOHWF pre-orders then expect the same bug ridden half finished game in October. A game focused on consoles and dumb casual gameplay, on PC battlefield is an embarrassment compared to past games like BF2 and 2142. BF3/4 is and will be designed to appeal to the lowest common denominator, console scrubs. I as a PC gamer I will look elsewhere for my FPS gaming.
I really hope BF4 integrates into the BF3 battlelog and acts almost like a huge expansion
Actually BF3 has proved itself to be a lot more than that, its had its set backs (i.e. the big patch before the most recent one kinda ruined the entire gameplay) but the devs seem to be committed to making it good for real PC gamers.Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
What are your recommendations for FPS ?Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
I'd agree. They seem to be patching it to make it like COD. I gave up on it with the last patch - final straw was allowing premium players to queue jump (I bought the full game so why penalise me?). I'm fed up with EA attitude to gamers - it stinks. I've moved onto World of Tanks now (yes its not a FPS but tanks was my reason for playing BF3).Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
You can get BF4 access with the cheaper "Limited" edition which is only $59.99 - and by my reckoning that's £40, so pretty much what you'd expect to pay for a top-shelf PS3 or XBox title, and not unduly more than a standard PC version.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roobubba
EA probably will suck the life out of BF, same as they (and Activision) do to all their big name titles. That said, I'm going to disagree with your assessment (assuming I understood the term "console scrubs") - BF3 on the PC is a FAR better game than on the console - graphically and in game play terms.Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
As to new FPS gaming on PC, there's not a lot of choice. And if you say "Halo 4" then I'm going to rofl.
lol, PC has no VOIP, PC uses a console GUI and the maps are designed better for a lower player count than 64 players, like say for consoles.Quote:
Originally Posted by BiscuitI really hope BF4 integrates into the BF3 battlelog and acts almost like a huge expansion
Actually BF3 has proved itself to be a lot more than that, its had its set backs (i.e. the big patch before the most recent one kinda ruined the entire gameplay) but the devs seem to be committed to making it good for real PC gamers.Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
Dice said BF3 will be E-sports focused and still there is no battlerecorder or a spectator mode, things the PC community have been asking for before the games release, essential features for E-sports and for admins to check on cheats in game, these came standard with BF2 and 2142. You really are delusional if you think Dice have supported the PC game well, hell the PC has to wait on consoles just to get a patch, that says it all.
Instead of fixing in game bugs through speedy updates on the PC and adding missing features to the game on PC, they are instead developing trash DLC and the money grab premium embarrassment.
Well planetside 2 and ARMA 3 will be a good place to start, currently playing Dayz, great game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Advertising a beta trial 12 months in advance just stinks of desperation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Atm, Tribes Ascend. If only because its a ton of fun that harkens back to the old UT days
Battlelog has voip, but who uses in game voip anyway?! If we are talking e-sports you would use TS or Vent.Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
What do yo mean by a console GUI, how would it differ to a PC gui anyway? Are you reffering to FOV (which is pretty easy to change)?
The battlerecorder and spectator modes are a drawback i will give you that, but the DLC has been decent so far, added enough into the game for me to not feel like i wasted my cash, and you get all of them for cheaper than you would if you bought them separately. Its better than the expansions for BF2 that no-one even bothered playing.
To me you just sound extremely bitter, i dont blame you i really dont but i have been an FPS gamer through clans and tournaments for years and i thoroughly enjoy BF3
You sound more like a console casual than a PC gamer just for the fact you don't know how the PC UI 'user interface ' is simply ported over from the consoles. Go check BF2 and 2142 for how a PC UI should operate and look. BC2 on 360 your first battlefield lol. Even better check out the numerous suggestions put forward to Dice to make BF3 more PC like in the UI department.Quote:
Originally Posted by BiscuitBattlelog has voip, but who uses in game voip anyway?! If we are talking e-sports you would use TS or Vent.Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
What do yo mean by a console GUI, how would it differ to a PC gui anyway? Are you reffering to FOV (which is pretty easy to change)?
The battlerecorder and spectator modes are a drawback i will give you that, but the DLC has been decent so far, added enough into the game for me to not feel like i wasted my cash, and you get all of them for cheaper than you would if you bought them separately. Its better than the expansions for BF2 that no-one even bothered playing.
To me you just sound extremely bitter, i dont blame you i really dont but i have been an FPS gamer through clans and tournaments for years and i thoroughly enjoy BF3
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/forum/threadview/2832654489499878081/
As for VOIP, on public servers it should be available to those that want to communicate with others for a better gaming experience, the fact you say battlelog has VOIP shows how clueless you are, it's not in game, it's worthless, BF2 and 2142 even had VOIP, a team based game should have in game VOIP like every other team based game on PC has, this for players to communicate with strangers in a squad, hell maybe make some new mates to play with.
You could say I'm bitter like many other fans of the franchise and I'm not talking about the scrubs that came in with bad company 2 like your good self. Dice said BF3 is the true sequel to BF2, only in name it is, the game is a console focused POS.
I guess I'm the only person who likes the look of Warfighter then XD - it's great being the odd one out...
Actually, i came from the original BF games, original COD games, MOH, Counter strike and all the other proper FPSs that probably came before your time. I bought my first console last year to play games when friends and family come to visit.Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
What a pathetic and unnecessary tone you are taking.
Come back and discuss the topic when you have grown up.
You guys should check out Arma 3 coming out soonish if you want a massive scale realistic experience with tonnes of user mods. Just check it out, trust me ;)
I might do that. I liked the sound of DayZ as well but not sure that it would be worth the purchase of ARMA2.
Whilst I agree with the general sentiment that EA/Dice truely screwed over PC gamers with the release of BF3 - it's no where near as bad you make out. EA still deserve a slap though for trying to make me pay for a "premium" subscripton @ £40, and for allowing people to cheat and get ahead by paying for XP/unlocks. Annoying but this is EA, they are well known scumbags and we should know better than to buy their games ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by raven1001
The HUD/UI is actually rather good and works well - a general improvement over the previous BF Games (not that "bad company" etc don't count there!). We got the Commo-rose back and whilst it's not up to the level of BF2/2142 it's useful enough and does the job well enough.
In game voip? I am so glad that we don't have this forced on us..no need to mute the screaming kids or idiots who think Lady GaGa should be played down the microphone. It's so easy to use TS or Vent for proper team based play, we don't need it in game. I never used it in BF2 or 2142 and didn't suffer, the vast majority never will either.
I am 100% in agreement on the map sizes though and this is my biggest grip. The BF series (again, Bad company etc don't count) were always made for large maps with lots of players..BF2 and 2142 in particular had huge maps with huge playable areas..this simply doesn't exist in BF3. Even my favourite BF map - Gulf of Oman - has been shrunk in terms of playable area. Sure the maps themselves may technically be large but if you can't go there and fight then whats the point?
Rush mode is/was a total waste of development time and should never have made it in - makes it a pain as sometimes you join a 64 player conquest large server in good faith and then the map rotates to Metro..I have to waste time loading it before i can quit and go play on a better server. Frustrating but I understand that they had to put this mode in to appease console gamers or Bad Company fans. Oh and again the single player was a total waste of money...
I still play and really Enjoy BF3 on 64 player conquest large servers - despite all my gripes/complaints I love the game..not as much as 2142 but it's a lot of fun, especially in 3D.
Back OT - I am looking forward to BF4 at the moment but with some apprehension..they really need to make Conquest Large the primary game mode again and open up the maps back to what they should be. This is actually promised for an expansion pack next year (some super large maps) but I will wait and see if they mean large, playable maps or just large maps that we can't explore.
I won't be buying Warfighter to get the early access this time around - I got burned by MOH last time being rather..average (not rubbish, just very short and not up to standard)..and then with our "early access" to BF3 beta being next to useless as it was only a week early..especially as I got into the alpha and official beta ahead of the MOH purchasers anyway.
If you like a tactical fps then I would say yeh cos you get to play Arma 2 as well as DayZ. To play DayZ you need Arma 2 and Operation Arrowhead (also sold in a bundle known as: Combined Operations). Not sure if the sale is still on but on the Bohemia Interactive store you could get that for £15 recently. Otherwise steam is doin it for 20 quid I think. Just be warned that you need a bit of patience to learn Arma. It'll take you weeks to get the hang of it rather than a day or 2 like BF3 (though I still love the hell out of BF3!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Phage
Actually I'll put my hand up as being another one who's looking forward to MOH:WF. Then again, I actually quite liked 2010's MOH - preferring some of it's single player to CoD:BO .Quote:
Originally Posted by sonico11
(Oh, and MoH:Airbourne beats CoD:3 every time)
Just praying that EA don't decide to pull an Activision and do one of those moronic "Elit3" pay-to-play deals. Oh, and a longer SP campaign would be great. ;)
What be nice is a WW2 expansion for BF3 like they did with Bad Company 2 Vietnam :)
Since the Battlefield 1943 never came out for the PC :(
MOHW is only £37.99 here in Uk and you get BF4 beta , iv pre-ordered as it looks nice and iv always liked MOH..
All the people saying there will be a MW4 , (there wont be a MW4 ) the story is finished thank God.
Whole new story coming ..
There will definitely be more COD and it will definitely be utter crap :-P
This seems so soon, some of us haven't got round to getting BF3 up and running. Was a huge BF2 fan, sad to hear what some people are saying about BF3...
I'm a MoH fan too - don't think the last campaign was nearly as bad as many reviewers suggested - sure it could have been longer, but then EA wouldn't have any scope for DLC... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by killswitch73
MW4 - new story? Fine, but that'll probably be the only difference.
I actually quite like BF3 - does that make me unusual. Heck, when BF4 comes out I'll definitely be doing a pre-order, something that I can't say with such certaintly about the latest CoD. As far as I'm concerned that MoH comes with BF4 beta access makes it a win-win in my book. The only choice I have then is PC or XBox. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by tre_peter
The EA money making gravy train rolls on... Sigh... Could have at least waited longer
Oh well, At least I had my fun in BF3, definately better than COD, coming from an ex COD player
http://i.imgur.com/Wzu9B.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by killswitch73
LOL'edQuote:
Surely we all know that's how it is. Warfighter sucks donkey's balls.
That's an understatement - I'm usually a fan of MOH, and this version has (arguably) a more involved story than the previous version, and looks better generally speaking - but in every other respect it's worse. Graphics glitches, painfully awful sound, and a very short SP mission (although there's some highlights of that). I'm giving serious consideration to trading this turkey in for Christmas. Hopefully the MP - which I'm not going to risk trying - would be better.Quote:
Originally Posted by nat327
My recommendation to folks is that unless you either want a warm up for CoD or really want that BF4 access then give this a miss. I got a copy of "Spec Ops: The Line" and while it's a bit cheesy, the SP story is far better/more-involving ... and it's cheaper to boot! :p