I am sooooooooooooooooo ****in' tired of modern military FPS games. Has there been anything said about a Mac version of the game? I assume not, but you never know.
Not to mention FrostBite 2 is all about DirectX 11. They are adding so many PC exclusive graphics features; compute shader, radiosity, tesselation, sun shafts, deferred rendering, etc." All the released Battlefield 3 footage is captured on an i7 + GTX 580 rig full in DX 11. You can expect the console version to look half as good at best.
Man, I can't believe this guy. There is no aim assist in BC2 console MP, I played it just earlier today. The hit marker might be different but otherwise, no aim assist. It's 32 on console and 64 on PC, DICE said it themselves. And it's not bad for a 32 player MP game, we've had games like Resistance or MAG on PS3 have more, but otherwise that's it, 32 isn't so bad. They could even up it to 48 players on PS3 because I bet it could handle it. Overall, it's going to be the best looking game availabe unless Uncharted, Mass Effect, or some other game (Minecraft ) tops it and have massive battles on PC and massive (for console) on console. This war ends here: ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________
If anything, every generation consoles seem to be getting closer to PC's I.E. Harddrives, web browsers, etc. Hell PS3 runs Linux! Isn't that technically a PC?... The whole PC is dying banter is the same as me saying consoles are for children. Neither is true but it makes ya feel better..
There is an option in the Menu to enable it, and you can bet a good number of players have it enabled.
Well according to every single forum on the web is about 50/50 split on whether it's active in MP or isn't. BUT it's in the options, AND the aiming is nothing like PC (that was my original argument). And regardless if you think that it doesn't help "stick" or " slow" while aimed on an enemy is negligible. Let's say for arguement sake it doesn't auto assist like you say (many people say it does just google it) A larger hit box is still an assist to you is it not? Bam aim assist... However you look at it. But that's ok if you need assistance, I would too with a joystick, that's why I use mouse, I'm able to react much faster, for Midians argument is why he doesn't like mouse, which is understandable, but I think it actually requires more skill to pull a head shot with a tiny hit box, vs a much larger on on console. I win the war! *Seriously though google the Aim Assist for multiplayer console Bc2 it's really split down the middle some say it does some say it doesn't, my point was play the PC ver. For awhile then console. There's assist whether it's from a larger hitbox or "sticky" reticule (and by sticky I mean it slows your aim down slightly, just a little bit.) Regardless everyone has it so it's not like it's a big deal, most FPS on console have some type of assist because you can never be as accurate as a mouse.
Let me be the first to say that I've been strictly console gaming (with the exception of RTS games) for my gaming history, but I am seriously considering buying the PC version of BF3 for all the extra visual effects and the larger multiplayer. My PC probably can't handle much more than medium graphics settings, but it's handled the Supreme Commander series pretty well, and that's a pretty graphic-intensive game, so I'm not too worried. And I'll probably stink horribly as I try to adjust to the control scheme, but that's not too big a deal for me. And as far as "skill" goes for each control scheme, I think it's like comparing a Mustang and a Corvette. You have a personal preference, but when it comes down to it, if you were forced to have either one, you're not gonna care too much as you begin driving at 80+ down the highway.
Well Supreme Commander is a lot easier to run by 2011 standards...but if you're fine with Medium settings, that's ok.
No lie, every major PC upgrade I've ever had has coincided with each BF release... From 1942 - BC2.. Seeing as they release them every couple years apart it works out pretty good! I went a little low on my PC for Bc2 so I'm thinking about putting together a monster rig for BF3... I'll probably start buying one piece a month so by the time Bf3 rolls around I'll have a sweet system to start playing on, my current pc can run it but I'll guarantee it won't be nearly as pretty as I want it! Anyone heard if it will be compatible with the nvidia 3D capable cards? If so that's probably the route I will go!...
No. I go shooting occasionally and the accuracy and speed is far outpaced by PC shooters. Unless I was Olympic champion or something. PC shooters are great, I enjoy them more than console shooters, the only reason I turned to console shooters is because I can't afford to upgrade my PC. But you PC elitists really piss me off sometimes.
Jesus get over yourself. The very fact you're comparing the sale of a PC game from 2007 with a PS3 game of 2009 just goes to show that nothing worthwhile happened on PCs in that time frame. Crysis is one of the few claims to fame it has left and even that's made the jump onto consoles, just like Battlefield did before it. Also, stop talking bullshit about gun accuracy please. You clearly have no idea what I'm even talking about. It makes absolutely zero difference where the margin of error comes from, the entire thing is faked in video games anyway. The fact of the matter is, it's too easy to get a kill with the accuracy of a mouse. Far, far too easy. If you know anything about firefights, you'll know they can actually take freakin' ages and so anything a game can do to lengthen the battles is heading towards realism. One of the tricks of the trade when it comes to FPS games is making firefights last as long as possible. On the one hand players are fairly impatient and just want to get to the next level so kills usually come fairly easily, on the other the firefights are actually the whole meat of the game and so should be spread out for as long as possible while staying exciting. Adding anything to the game that turns the player from being a soldier into a robotic supersoldier from space is going to start jeopardizing that, it's a careful balance. Using a mouse is easier, not many people deny that. PC gamers will tell you they're better because they think that anything that improves their skill at the game is a plus. This is illogical when considering the paragraph above, but logicial in the sense that gamers are a proud bunch of assholes who seem to think a good K-D ratio means they have a higher sperm count than other males. Ideally, the things you mentioned: recoil, bullet spread (wind, gravity, etc) would be exaggerated sufficiently to counter this new accuracy, but most attempts to do so have met with complaints from gamers about the game being sluggish and all the other crap they come up with. In the end, the mouse still retains it's unfair advantage (also in large part due to snap direction changing which I haven't even covered) and playing an FPS becomes an easier and less realistic experience when using one. It'd be great for games like Halo though, which is essentially an arcade shooter and is set in the future where presumably we've all evolved into cyborgs anyway. P.S. Stop getting so riled up, this was a perfectly good discussion before you turned it into an argument. P.P.S. Fix your damn username already.
I'm by no means a PC "elitist". I've played on console and PC for ages, for me I've never liked the aim assist on consoles, I feel it's lame and doesn't make for good gaming, anyone I know who's a console gamer by nature and tries to use PC fails miserably. So the argument that mouse is easier IMO would be a false assumption. More accurate yes, but i know at least 5 strictly console gamers that are friends and no matter how hard they try, KB+ Mouse is too hard for them (thier words not mine) On PC most shooters hit box is just the guy. On console the hit box is the guy and about 3 feet on either side of him. To keep a mouse on point with a realistic hit zone and to hit those targets while moving is much harder IMO than having aim assist an a giant hitbox. Play any shooter like COD BF HALO whatever, the console versions are way easier For me and less enjoyable. As for the length of the firefights I actually find them to be much shorter on console?.. Especially BF...
That whole argument relies on the assumption that console shooters don't have an "Auto Aim On/Off" option, which most do these days. I'm not sure what that weird thing about your console friends being terrible at PC games is supposed to mean... I'm sure your approach to that research was incredibly scientific though The exaggerated "three feet" remark obviously came out of desperation, it's not worth arguing against when we both know it's ridiculous. And the last sentence is just... you saying something that doesn't have any relevance to the discussion. There's me carefully dissecting the art of game development and your response is just "No". This topic has really gone downhill, if you don't want to be a part of it just say so otherwise it'll start to sound more like trolling.
Actually I've compared The hitboxes compared to Bf2 and BF modern combat and there is a HUGE DIFFERENCE! This debate can go back and forth all night, but my point is you think mouse and Kb is easier, if that was the case why don't most people play console with mouse and kb? pS3 can handle it but no one uses it why? Because it takes more skill... I have played console FPS many times over and the aim assist turned on and is used by pretty much everyone online or it is automatically enabled for all mp matches case in point BF1943 for ps3. Just because you say this debate has gone downhill doesn't mean much to me, seems like your just trying to end the debate which in all actuality there is no end. It ALL preference, you can't honestly compare the two. But I have seen a million times over with friends or whoever, they can be the best cod player on ps3 put them on my pc and they can't even control the gun, true story, I'll video my cousin next time he comes by and he flat out says I hate pc gaming the controls suck and are too hard. Fair enough, I'm not saying console gamers suck, I'm one myself, I just choose to play FPS on pc because on console it's too easy. Yes I said it TOO EASY. So back to battlefield. The PC version will be the one to get and thats not my words, thats coming from the developer an game designers. So you don't have to listen to me at all about which version will be better. Just wait til the reviews come rolling in around release date. And as for your careful dissection of game development give me a break Midian, your explanation was that mouse is faster so the firefights are shorter durrrrhurrr.... Scientific buddy real Stephen hawking you are lol My dissection is this, due to every Console gamer using auto aim/aim assist and the much larger hit boxes (your right no need to argue that, everyone knows it's true!) 3 ft may be slight exaggeration. Bit because of this console firefights are much shorter because of that and that's not realistic at all. That's why I play on pc, it's much harder to hit someone and the firefights last longer. #Science
I think the bottom line is this: you think you're correct because you and your friends say so. That's very cute. ...and no, not many PS3 games actually have mouse and keyboard support. One of the main reasons for this is because of the unfair advantage it would bring due to mouse control being significantly easier. My dissection is actually a fairly common talking point among game developers, it crops up on dev blogs and sites like Gamasutra from time to time and often brings great insight and discussion. Sure I may have simplified it for the purposes of this discussion but it's still a far sight better than your "But I'm special so it's different!" response. If you're not actually going to use the discussion for y'know... discussing things... then don't bother replying at all. That's why I'm trying to end the debate, there's no point in me actually having a conversation here if the only reply I'm going to get is "Naww!".
LoL, wasn't that you who said that? RoFL dude go back and read your posts lol But I Concede Midian! Your 100% right about me being special If you remember correctly though all I merely said was pc will be the version to get, and that's not coming from me!!! LoL it's coming from the developers, and if I remember correctly it was you who than started this debate about why I'm wrong... Don't tell me call up dice and tell the guys who made it! As for the console Vs pc debate that's a circular argument which really has no point. It's all preference, but for you to make it sound like anyone can play a FPS with mouse and keyboard because it's easier is laughable. It's merely a different way to play, it doesn't make one better than the other but for some reason you keep trying to come off as belittling PC gamers for preferred control scheme. My original point which you keep ignoring and was never meant to become a debate about controls of all thing was the PC version will be better. Simple fact. And guess what you can even use a 360 controller on the PC version depending on your preference!
