On May 23 2012 11:24 Praetorial wrote: So I've been thinking about buying this game, but
are revives really that good? Seems a bit unrealistic?
I don't know what you mean by "that good." However, yes, it only takes one 'hit' to bring someone back to life (glitches aside).
The reason he's getting so many revives in a row is because this is Rush mode, and everyone's rushing to the bomb. In other words, more people are dying in a concentrated area for him to revive.
Worst map in game and you don't really have people running around spam reviving anywhere else.
But no the revive isn't realistic, never bothered me too much though. When you get revived you don't instantly pop up either but start by lying on the ground with pistol equipped.
I don't know what you mean by "that good." However, yes, it only takes one 'hit' to bring someone back to life (glitches aside).
The reason he's getting so many revives in a row is because this is Rush mode, and everyone's rushing to the bomb. In other words, more people are dying in a concentrated area for him to revive.
Worst map in game and you don't really have people running around spam reviving anywhere else.
But no the revive isn't realistic, never bothered me too much though. When you get revived you don't instantly pop up either but start by lying on the ground with pistol equipped.
Revive is good in the game for two reasons: 100/110 points per revive, and improves the other person's KDR. Improves your KDR when you get revived.
Sure, it's unrealistic, and arguably broken, but that's what makes it a Battlefield game.
Anything related to Op Metro, and to some extent Damavand peak and Seine Crossing will be things you cannot possibly draw any conclusion from. They're almost always giant clusterfucks of random bullshit. Revive is good, it's amazing when you use it correctly in squad play or when it makes sense. That they added the option to not say yes to a revive is also great, but simply spamming revives and never doing anything else is neither representative of the game or useful in any way.
Well, I mean, the entire idea of revives are really unrealistic. What DICE did is remove elements of realism (getting healed, jumping out of helicopters) for the preservation of fun. Because they wanted to have a way to have people work together and revive one another, and adding a defib to the assault class seems a good a way as any. And personally, let me just say that I think you should definitely get it
What platform would you buy it on? On PC I have a few friends that still play, you could join up.
EDIT: Oh and doing that kind of crazy revive chain takes a combination of a lot of luck, as well as a little skill. I am not trying to dis the guy who made that video, but what I am saying is that it is not every day stuff to get a 1000+ point revive chain.
BF3 would be so bad if people couldn't be revived. Enough people getting hit by random snipers from any direction... if there was no way to mitigate those loses, the game would get old fast.
I'm astounded by what a retard the guy that the video made is. Or there is some kind of sarcasm that I don't get. It just adds to the cake that he played on console.
So ive had this game from da 1 and i have not plaed more than 50 hours on it. The game is horrible and also to add to that the amount of lag is incredible even on my 100mbit internet package. Anyone who is looking to buy it the only good side of the things are the vehicles. When in a vehicle ou feel like you can control the world. Flying in jets on the highest graphics is breathtaking and the sounds are pretty cool to. The weapons feel a bit gimicky like theyre lagging in the recoil but you just have to get used to it. For any QSers out there it is still possible to do so althogh a challenge like when black ops first came out :D Overall i would say graphics/10 gameplay: 7/10 connection: 3/10 and last but not least overall: 6/10.
On May 23 2012 22:38 DeluXe1337 wrote: So ive had this game from da 1 and i have not plaed more than 50 hours on it. The game is horrible and also to add to that the amount of lag is incredible even on my 100mbit internet package. Anyone who is looking to buy it the only good side of the things are the vehicles. When in a vehicle ou feel like you can control the world. Flying in jets on the highest graphics is breathtaking and the sounds are pretty cool to. The weapons feel a bit gimicky like theyre lagging in the recoil but you just have to get used to it. For any QSers out there it is still possible to do so althogh a challenge like when black ops first came out :D Overall i would say graphics/10 gameplay: 7/10 connection: 3/10 and last but not least overall: 6/10.
What are you on about? Non-fps lag is based on ping, not download speed. Find servers taht are closer than yours for christ's sake. That won't be hard, there are literally thousands of servers in every region of the world. Since that seems to seriously be your only point of dicord, I suggest you figure out your own connection problems and THEN go off on this game. Shit, this game is far from perfect, but to dismiss it like you just did is simply insulting, in my opinion.
To each their own, I suppose. I just don't why you would come in here and then double post if you seem to have already made a decision on the game.
On May 23 2012 22:38 DeluXe1337 wrote: So ive had this game from da 1 and i have not plaed more than 50 hours on it. The game is horrible and also to add to that the amount of lag is incredible even on my 100mbit internet package.
Well, I've got only 10mbit connection, and my ping is around a consistent 35-40 range... so yeah, you've probably just picked some server on another continent or something. Don't hate on the game because you don't know how the internet works, buddy.
Honest review for anyone on the fence about getting it: If you have a higher-end PC, there is absolutely no reason (other than being poor, but then, you've got a high end PC so maybe manage money better?) not to have this game. The graphics are unparalleled. Youtube vids can't even do it justice, as all games suffer graphic quality loss when being recorded in online play. You literally have to see the game running on Ultra for yourself to truly understand just how realistic everything looks in this game. But graphics aside...
The gameplay, though having a few areas that could use improving (as ALL games do), is very fun, mainly because the situations you get into unfold like some crazy war movie. No two firefights are the same, and there's so much chaos and destruction all around... really puts you into the game. The 64 man CQ games on the really big maps give off a really good "combat" feel, and you find yourself in situations that put you at a total loss to describe them because they are just really crazy and cool and fun.
Some advice though - play with people you know. Get friends on there, join a clan, or whatever you gotta do, just play with people you can talk to over teamspeak/xfire/etc. because the opportunity to coordinate really makes the game shine.
As for console: yeah... it's better on PC by FAR. Can't stand the game on XBox after playing on a PC... totally spoiled by it.
I don't know what you mean by "that good." However, yes, it only takes one 'hit' to bring someone back to life (glitches aside).
The reason he's getting so many revives in a row is because this is Rush mode, and everyone's rushing to the bomb. In other words, more people are dying in a concentrated area for him to revive.
Worst map in game and you don't really have people running around spam reviving anywhere else.
But no the revive isn't realistic, never bothered me too much though. When you get revived you don't instantly pop up either but start by lying on the ground with pistol equipped.
Revive is good in the game for two reasons: 100/110 points per revive, and improves the other person's KDR. Improves your KDR when you get revived.
Sure, it's unrealistic, and arguably broken, but that's what makes it a Battlefield game.
I remember when Battlefield was recognized as an exaggerated imagining of war, and not a realistic tactical shooter (although it still isn't, a lot of people look at BF3 like that). Gamespot referred to BF42 as a comic book version of World War 2 back in the day.
Also, I haven't played the game in a while and the M26 darts are still at large? Get your shit together, DICE!
It doesn't really have any lag issues as far as I'm concerned on a 20mbit line. None at all. What it does however have, that drags it into the shitter is an utterly shit coding. Clientside hit detection and random retarded crap like that. Not only is it incredibly inefficient, it's also one of the most rage inducing things you'll ever come by since it makes anyone you die to a cheating scumbag, even if he isn't.
Realism just has no say in anything. Destruction was always just a new way to differentiate. It's a great thing for sure, and before BC1 was made, something I always envisioned for FPS games. It just doesn't have to do with realism, just as nothing else has it. It's still an arcade game.
On May 24 2012 01:04 LoLAdriankat wrote: Also, I haven't played the game in a while and the M26 darts are still at large? Get your shit together, DICE!
M26 glitch still being exploited, yeah. But the stigma is so bad that anyone who wants to be taken as a serious gamer stays away from them. If I check your Battlelog and it shows a few hundred M26 kills, I'm going to think less of you, and know your skill isn't genuine. I think it's the fear of that which makes others stay away. That being said, there's always at least one guy in a given server doing it.
As for DICE: I read that it costs several tens of thousands of dollars to release a patch, so they are probably waiting until they've ironed out some other bugs too before patching. Honestly though, I run into it maybe twice a match on average, which to me is no huge deal for now.
On May 24 2012 01:04 LoLAdriankat wrote: Also, I haven't played the game in a while and the M26 darts are still at large? Get your shit together, DICE!
M26 glitch still being exploited, yeah. But the stigma is so bad that anyone who wants to be taken as a serious gamer stays away from them. If I check your Battlelog and it shows a few hundred M26 kills, I'm going to think less of you, and know your skill isn't genuine. I think it's the fear of that which makes others stay away. That being said, there's always at least one guy in a given server doing it.
As for DICE: I read that it costs several tens of thousands of dollars to release a patch, so they are probably waiting until they've ironed out some other bugs too before patching. Honestly though, I run into it maybe twice a match on average, which to me is no huge deal for now.
^ It only costs ten thousand dollars per patch for consoles. Theoretically, they can still provide regular patches for PC users for cheap. They just don't want to develop patches only for the PC.
Yeah, it's not that bad. I usually just delude myself into pretending that he's a recon who's amazing at quickscope headshots. Cuts down the rage by about 80%, lol.
I don't know if you could see that the use the M26 DART glitch applies to everyone; people on Metro loved to use it pre-patch as an alternative to the M320. Also, isn't it a very specific instance with the Heavy Barrel attachment, though everyone runs Heavy Barrel anyway for the benefits.
I run on a 1Mbit connection, and I usually get acceptable ping from 50-80, mostly because I pick servers that are close to me. Download speed doesn't matter a lot in FPS, unless you're using your speed for other purposes. Sure, the netcoding sucks, but that's the environment that FPS players have to deal with not having a LAN connection.
Coordination helps a lot, but I actually like to lone-wolf most of the time because I can't deal with idiotic teammates that run like lemmings. The major reason why I join squads is to use their perks and spawn locations (a lot of the times useless). Orders are so hard to put post-patch that I've been using a lot less lately (can't highlight target sometimes/takes a long time).
On May 24 2012 05:07 Phelix wrote: Coordination helps a lot, but I actually like to lone-wolf most of the time because I can't deal with idiotic teammates that run like lemmings. The major reason why I join squads is to use their perks and spawn locations (a lot of the times useless). Orders are so hard to put post-patch that I've been using a lot less lately (can't highlight target sometimes/takes a long time).
I joined a BF3 clan (armoredfist.net) that specializes in 32v32 scrims and the coordination that goes along with it (we do small-scale TWL ladder stuff too like 4v4s and 8v8s, but the focus is 32v32). It's really something to see in action. As one of the strategic coordinators for the clan, I can assure you the potential for teamwork to pay big dividends is there. Planning strats around squads rather than individuals becomes a very cool dynamic, like commanding at a higher level than just a squad leader. I'd say if you're looking for the best way to maximize the fun you have with BF3, this type of clan is very solid. The only problem is there is no leagues or ladders for 32v32 matches, so matches tend to be hard to come by outside a clan setting. Not a ton of clans big enough to field a full 32 man team either, so even within a clan, scrims can be infrequent sometimes.
On May 24 2012 05:07 Phelix wrote: I don't know if you could see that the use the M26 DART glitch applies to everyone; people on Metro loved to use it pre-patch as an alternative to the M320. Also, isn't it a very specific instance with the Heavy Barrel attachment, though everyone runs Heavy Barrel anyway for the benefits.
I run on a 1Mbit connection, and I usually get acceptable ping from 50-80, mostly because I pick servers that are close to me. Download speed doesn't matter a lot in FPS, unless you're using your speed for other purposes. Sure, the netcoding sucks, but that's the environment that FPS players have to deal with not having a LAN connection.
Coordination helps a lot, but I actually like to lone-wolf most of the time because I can't deal with idiotic teammates that run like lemmings. The major reason why I join squads is to use their perks and spawn locations (a lot of the times useless). Orders are so hard to put post-patch that I've been using a lot less lately (can't highlight target sometimes/takes a long time).
So tell me why it was never prevalent in any other way than simple good old lag in the older games in the series. Even when these games had capacity for more players. They've fucked it up and gotten lazy somewhere.
Aside from the standard client-side prediction that generally causes the most frustration out of players (Example: Running around a corner and getting shot), BF3 poses a bigger problem because of the destructive environment.
My assumption is that running Frostbite 2.0 and the destructive environment causes a huge amount of data to be distributed to every player. There are more objects in the game, and every time something changes, the data has to be sent to every player. From a simple fence cut, to windows being broken, to a building collapse and calculating who dies, the server has to parse out the information of the state, and my guess is that there's too much data to handle at a short period of time. Though I agree with you that DICE might have gotten lazy somewhere, mostly through not testing these effects that might happen.
EPT
/10 gameplay: 7/10 connection: 3/10 and last but not least overall: 6/10.
