Battlefield 3

bwahahaha nice one!

Multiplayer looks win.

lolz check out modernwarfare3.com now - a couple of changes are on it. Obviously not the work of DICE or EA but still hilarious

Not sure what im looking at?

Completed single player in BFBC2 yesterday, wasnt great, far too easy, far to dumbed down and not really that fun, bar the odd mission.

Bugger they've taken it down. Modernwarfare3.com was made by Battlefield fans and it has changed from going to the Battlefield homepage to a complete parody of modern warfare. Was funny stuff. Unfortunately Activision issued a suit against it and it seems they won. Terrible shame that the internet, last bastion of free speech has come to this - "oh we don't like what this website says so we'll give the courts some money and they'll take it down. Jolly good"

As for the single player, last few levels (especially the one on the place) were a bit of a let down but overall I still enjoyed the story, most notably the earlier levels in the jungles and snowy mountains. Story still pwns COD - try playing through Black Ops' story - it's literally a case of "WATCH THIS CUTSCENE! NOW PRESS A TO STEAL THAT GUY'S WEAPON! NOW WATCH ANOTHER CUTSCENE! NOW PRESS RT AND WATCH IN SLOW MOTION THIS BULLET HITTING THE ENEMY IN THE HEAD! Repeat for 10 levels.

Good omens ahead for Battlefield 3 I reckons...

Battlefield Bad Company 2 jumps to the number 1 spot on the Xbox sales chart, despite being released a year and a half ago. Quoted from CVG...

Good Battlefield 3 press may behind a new lease of life for Battlefield: Bad Company 2 as the EA DICE shooter - which was released last year - jumps six places to take the No.1 spot on this week's official UK Xbox 360 sales chart.

Following at No.2 is last week's chart-topper Dirt 3, while Brink is up five spots to No.3 and FIFA 11 and Lego Pirates of the Caribbean round off the top five.

LA Noire drops one place to No.6, while the All Formats chart leader Zumba Fitness sits at No.7, ahead of Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, which leaps from No.14 to No.8.

GfK/Chart-Track Xbox 360 Top 10 (week ending August 20):

01. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (EA)
02. Dirt 3 (Codemasters)
03. Brink (Bethesda)
04. FIFA 11 (EA)
05. Lego Pirates of the Carribean (Disney)
06. LA Noire (Take 2)
07. Zumba Fitness (505 Games)
08. Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood (Ubisoft)
09. Call of Juarez: The Cartel (Ubisoft)
10. Skate 3 (EA)

Yeah know of a lot of people who got sick of the whole CoD thing and bought BF2 to see what it was like. Only for them to get rid of CoD soon after and have completely moved to BF. Good omen indeed, new game looks sweet and the multiplayer fighter jet battles looks like win.

Aye can't wait for fighter jet fun, and trying to take one down with a pistol!

This cracked me up.

Electronic Arts has been hurling insults at Activision for months, as it seeks to sell copies of forthcoming shooter Battlefield 3 and take share from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3.

The war of words hasn't all been one-sided. Around E3 time Activision boss Bobby Kotick cast negative comments at Battlefield 3's console versions. More recently, Bobby's second-in-command Eric Hirshberg said EA's verbal assault is "bad for our industry", specifically slamming EA's management for stating that Call of Duty should "rot from the core".

Now, EA has ramped up the pressure. The company's chief spokesman Jeff Brown used trade site IndustryGamers to toss some abuse at Hirshberg. he said, "Welcome to the big leagues Eric. I know you're new in the job but someone should have told you this is an competitive industry.

"You've got every reason to be nervous. Last year Activision had a 90 share in the shooter category. This year, Battlefield 3 is going to take you down to 60 or 70. At that rate, you'll be out of the category in 2-3 years. If you don't believe me, go to the store and try to buy a copy of Guitar Hero or Tony Hawk."

Aye read that recently, quite hilarious really. Yeah there's no real need for it but when you know your game is better than modern warfail then why not? Plus activision aren't really that popular anyway

David Goldfarb, lead designer of Battlefield 3 has been talking about the game's single-player campaign, and facing questions on the shooter's length.

A VG247 interviewer said that he had spent six hours playing through 2009's Modern Warfare 2's single-player campaign, and asked if Battlefield 3 would be longer. Goldfarb replied, "I'd say it was probably slightly more than that. Based on our play-times it's probably more than that, but it's not twice as long. But, again, we'll see. When you play it on hard difficulty, it'll take a lot more time. It's all about making sure the experience is as awesome as possible. I'd rather have six hours of awesome than 12 hours of 'meh'."

He added that the company was aware that some players would want to go back and play the single-player campaign, rather than just playing multiplayer. "I think we have some pretty cool achievements that people will want to go back and get," he said. "It's not like an RPG in that way, but we have tried to incentivize people to come back and play on different difficulties, and so on."

Goldfarb also addressed the game's story-mode, and the political situations it would cover. Battlefield 3 is set in a modern-day Middle East combat setting, but developer DICE and publisher EA say they want to avoid "demonizing" any population groups.

He said, "It's not about religions, or populations of people and it's not about countries. It is fiction, and…we have to be very cautious about what it suggests because people will take it in a certain way. We're really trying to make it feel real, but at the same time we have an obligation to not demonize people or places, and I think that's something that's really important to us."

Maybe Im coming from gaming in a bygone era here with the NES/PSX final fantasy games taking around 60 hours to complete each, but 6-12 hours of gameplay sounds pisspoor for me, coming from what will be one of the biggest sellers of the year - shame thats the way things seem to be going.

Good to see there might be a reason to go back to the single player after you complete it once. Aside from the multiplayer in BF2, which is phenominal, Ill not be back in the single player mode, nothing really to grab my attention second time around.

Too many developers think it's ok to throw out a six hour game and hope people will stay for the multiplayer. Worst thing is, most people now accept it. I'd prefer a good long adventure game instead - just finished uncharted on ps3 and took about 15 hours, plus I'll be going back to find hidden treasures and play through the story again. Mgs4 also seems quite long - 6 hours in and I'm only in the 2nd act. -apparently deus ex human revolution takes around 25 hours to complete, which is encouraging. Fallout 3 also took me 35 hours! Bring back longer games FTW!

Yeah there is a lot of emphasis on the multiplayer these days, which fair enough, when done right is brilliant, however its really sacrificing the single player modes which I find a shame. If Im going out to spend £40 on a game, which I rarely do, I make sure its a good game which Ill be coming back to time and time again. Like I was texting you yesterday, I spent £40 on Final Fantasy IX when it came out - 2000 were talking here, it takes around 60 hours to complete and do most side quests, which are great fun, and you will STILL go back to it to do other things - max level up, best weapons, all items and beat Ozma (level 99, HP well over 60,000 - best attack you can do is 9,999...if you ever get the chance...)

Once Im free again Ill be back into FF13, then into Lost Odyssey, both of which have 60+ hours to complete.

I ever show anyone my uber, and I MEAN UBER, Final Fantasy X save? 300hours plus.

If there was ever multiplayer -party Vs someone elses party battles possible in that game, Id tank anyone.

Aye JRPGs, if you're into them, usually give the best value for money in terms of playing time. Multiplayer games offer the same if they are good, but too many COUGHCALLOFDUTYCOUGH ruin it with stupid map packs for ridiculous prices, expecting players to pay £40 for the game, then £10 a pop for 4 or 5 map packs. For me Battlefield 3 is the exception when buying games - usually I get them for the single-player then move onto multiplayer when finished but Battlefield 3 is definitely one of the few games I'm buying near enough for multiplayer only

Dave wrote:Battlefield 3 is definitely one of the few games I'm buying near enough for multiplayer only

FIGHTER. JETS.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/09/new-battlefield-3-trailer-shows-off-physical-warfare-pack.ars

http://uk.gamespot.com/showcases/battlefield-3-uk?sid=6333388&overridePid=621026

this game appeals.

Rest in peace Call of Duty.

Month and a half to go!!!!

Alan you will particularly enjoy the first video on this link

Clicky

Deleted already. Mes thinks EA might have done it themselves.

Better looking interface this time it seems too.

Stupid leaked videos! Anyhow it was fighter jet gameplay, very niiice

I like the cockyness at the end here...

As much as I don't like Jay-Z or the song, it actually works quite well in the trailer! I wonder if the "bitch" he is referring to is COD lololololol. The line at the end was very cheeky, but true!

Beta supposedly out today on Xbox around 2pm. 3.9GB download too - could be a while! Apparently most impressions so far are that its the best Battlefield yet - improves on everything that was good about BFBC2 and apparently the graphics on Xbox/PS3 are so good that if you didn't know you were playing it on a console, you'd be fooled into thinking it was running off a high-end PC. Will update later on with my impressions if and once I manage to get my hands on the beta

Apologies, the beta download is only 1.30GB. Currently downloading now ftw

Dave wrote:Apologies, the beta download is only 1.30GB. Currently downloading now ftw

Shat myself when you said it was 3.whatever.

1.3 will take about 2hours for me. Huzzah.

Right. Here it is. My impressions of Le Beta du Battlefield 3.

WINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN

In all seriousness I do have some thoughts lol.

Graphics

For all those moaning about the graphics on console, I just don't get it. It looks fantastic on both Xbox and PS3 (tried it on both). Although it does look a bit better on Xbox than on PS3. Sorry Dale. It's a bit clearer, the colours are slightly deeper and it seems to have a marginally (but I mean marginally) better draw distance compared to the PS3 version. All in all, lots of detail, and particles such as dust, smoke (and even feathers outside) flying about etc. Player models are ok, not fantastic but who cares because you're not gonna be seeing much of them up close anyway, except for a couple of cheeky knife kills.

Gameplay

If you've played plenty of BC2, then you'll feel right at home. Controls are (from what I can see) identical to those of BC. The only new introduction to the controls is the prone position but it's done using the right analog stick - click once for crouch (as you do in BC2) click again for prone, or hold it down to go straight from standing straight to prone. Movement etc is very similar to BC2 except they've smoothed it out a lot more - movement is quicker and responses to button presses seem a bit quicker too. Some nice new touches too when jumping over things - unlike in BC2 when you jump over something, your character just awkwardly tries to walk over, in 3 it performs a quick vaulting animation which is pretty cool. There seem to be some different animations for different types of ledges e.g. jumping over a wall, you just see your hand on the wall pushing your body over, but jumping over a fence on a ledge to the ground below, you see your legs dangling beneath you. Nothing big, but it looks cool and is deffs very "1st person experience".

As for the way it plays, its a lot like BC2 but guns feel better, movement is quicker, smoother and more responsive etc. Classes have changed a bit from what I could see - Assault now has medic integrated into it, which actually makes sense if you play it. Support has ammunition to hand out, and engineers finally get to use assault rifles instead of solely smgs. Loadouts are generally the same, where you can change your classes, weapons and attachments at the spawn screen as you would in BC2. One difference though is that, depending on which team you are on, you start off with different weapons e.g. As the US Army, the Assault class starts with an M16, whereas in the Middle East/Terrorist/Yahoo group, you start off with an AK47. Didn't get much chance to unlock many other guns so don't know if you can unlock them all and use them regardless of what team you are on. Although this was done in Battlefield 2 (and overlooked in BC2), and guns were based on what team you were in, I'm gonna guess they're gonna keep it team-based.

Other points

The map (Operation Metro) is good fun. It seems to be set on Rush-mode only (from BC2) but is good as it gives you access to more of the map than you would get in Conquest. Plus Rush mode is awesome anyway. It starts off in a large Central-Park style area in Paris. One team defends the 2 MCOM stations, the other attacks. Once they are destroyed, the defenders are pushed back into the subway system. Once the stations there are destroyed, they are pushed further back into the station, and eventually out onto the streets of Paris on the other side. It's a pretty good map as it has a good mix of open areas (Park, streets) and close quarters areas (subway). My only problem with it is in the subway, it can be quite hard to see, so you find yourself getting shot from all directions.

Speaking of getting shot. In BC2 when you got shot at, you were shown which direction the fire was coming from by way of a big red arch on the screen. It's still used in Battlefield 3 but it's a lot more subtle, making it harder to tell where you're getting shot from. I suppose it could be a good thing, as it makes things a bit more realistic etc, although I found myself getting killed and just falling over without having any idea where I got hit from, meaning I'm gonna have to be more careful running around the maps.

Although gameplay vids show this map with vehicles etc, the beta has no vehicles in it, so I don't know what types will be in it or what they will drive like (although its safe to say they'll be near the same as BC2)

All in all, tis very good fun (even if it is just one map and game mode) and October 28th can't come any quicker! If Modern Warfare 3 doesn't bring in any new features or ideas, it's in big trouble (despite probably outselling Battlefield anyway) because going by this Battlefield will blow it away. If this video is anything to go by, Modern Warfare should be dead and buried. Literally just looks like a new map pack for MW2. Shocking stuff.