Battlefield 3 teased, PC is top priority

[Matthew DeCarlo]

With consoles receiving a lot of preferential treatment lately, it's no surprise that PC gamers immediately questioned the development focus of DICE's upcoming Battlefield installment. Fortunately, Game Informer affirms that the title is being crafted with PC gamers in mind. "We won't make it for console and port it to PC -- that's not how we do things," said executive producer Patrick Bach. "We're focusing on PC first, and then we fiddle with it to fit it onto consoles."

The studio was serious when it said it wanted to build the best Battlefield ever. Battlefield 3 has been on the whiteboard for years and its team is twice the size of BFBC2's. DICE has been waiting to harness the power of Frostbite 2.0 and the company shared some impressive details about BF3. For starters, it reportedly features improved lighting elements, with one "probe" containing more lighting information than an entire level of 2010's Battlefield: Bad Company 2.

The game is expected to launch in Q4 2011 with an M rating and features co-op play, four classes, more unlockables and better, more immediate post-release content than BFBC2, along with well-balanced character customization that doesn't rely on "pink rabbit hats." Level destruction has been cranked up, character animations are more realistic courtesy of EA Sports' ANT engine, war sounds have been captured at various distances to ensure realism, and improved audio cues.

The PC version has 64-person multiplayer while consoles will be limited to 24 (supposedly because console gamers are happy with that). Settings will include New York, Paris, Tehran, Sulaymaniyah, and Iraqi Kurdistan, but it isn't clear if any of these will be specific to single or multiplayer. Mod tools won't be available at launch -- if ever -- because Frostbite 2.0 is said to be too complex and DICE would rather focus on polishing the game instead of simplifying its dev tools.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/42345-battlefield-3-teased-pc-is-top-priority.html

 

[Guest]

this seems to be going in the right direction i wouldn't be surprised if battlefield was going to beat the next cod again xD and as for the pc is top priority im expecting some ****ing amazing stuff to be going on and atm its a good year for pc gamers!

 

[Cueto_99]

Can't wait to fly an F-15, and wreck havoc among the 32 enemy players ! Although I wonder, how are we going to be able to shut down an aircraft... Land-to-air missiles? Railguns? Top priority game for this year!

 

[fpsgamerJR62]

If DICE can deliver on all of its promises, then Battlefield 3 could indeed be the best Battlefield game ever. I'm personally hoping to see a solid single player campaign on top of Battlefield's usual excellent multiplayer component. As for the next installment of CoD, BF3 could be beat it in every department yet I suspect that Activision will again sell millions of copies of this game just on the basis of the Call of Duty name. Here's looking forward to a solid gaming year.

 

[Guest]

BFBC2 Blew my mind.
BF3 looks like it will be epic.

Bring on the destructible worlds,
I want to see whole apartment blocks destroyed with the enemy still inside.

 

[Burty117]

Funny, the last bit about Console gamers being "happy" with 24 player is actually true!

I'm a PC gamer, always has always will. I now live with my friend who has always loved consoles, always have alwas will.

My Setup is a decent spec PC, 22" full HD screen, razor mouse keyboard and Bose Companion 5.

His setup is a Samsung 5.1 surround sound, 32" Full HD LCD TV, Xbox 360 Elite (only 2 weeks old) a brand new PS3 (4 weeks old) with loads of games.

I went up to him after reading this and said "Battlefield 3 is coming to PC and Consoles, PC can handle 64 player online, Console is limited to 24. Why do you love these Sh*t boxes?"

He instantly went into one about how consoles don't need that many players and that, if it did it would be impossible to play or win blah blah blah...

Some times, Console owners absolutely amaze me.

 

[Guest]

I'd like to see facial treatment like the one being used on L.A. Noir. It's simply absurdly realistic for a game.

We have tons of First-person shooters; what makes all the difference is attention to details, without compromising the playability.

Bring us a deep, immersive experience.

BFBC2 was great, Vietnam brought nice refreshment.

The bar shall be raised for BF3.


Cheers!

 

[ElShotte]

I think they did raise the bar on BF3. BF2 was phenomenal, BF3 will be even better. And I am either going to get the Special Edition or buy the DLC BF2 Mappack later, I want to see BF2 environments destroyed, great example of how video games moved into the future over the past couple years.

 

[ElShotte]

@burty117: Console gamers aren't capable of thinking outside the box... they settle for less by nature. Us PC gamers are always getting the latest parts and all so a game can perform or look better on our system as the graphics and technology head into the future. PS3 and X360 are OLD now, and theyre way behind. We settle on the best, they just settle. And in all honesty, especially in the case of BF3, who's going to get the better gameplay experience? I mean seriously, we will have maps that are 4-5 times the size, epic 64 player battles, and they'll just have BFBC2 - 8 players + jets.

 

[frodough]

kudos to DICE

every gamers knows that most game makers want to make games primarily for consoles due to 2 main reasons:

1) consoles are very popular platform to massive audiences, thus potential to be very profitable

2) PC platform require extra securities for games due to piracy

i have to give it to DICE for having such faith in its game and PC. i truly believe that they KNOW the best experience in playing BF games are on PC and PC only.

personally i think console gaming are dumbing down gamers - making them lazier just so the platform can go mainstream and hit the livingroom. you lose so much flexibility trying to run and aim with just 2 thumbs than it is using keyboard / mouse, and that's the truth. same reason why XBOX never 'continued' running games on cross-server/cross platform (because they tried it on original Halo and an average PC user can easily out play & out maneuver even some of the expert players on the console side.

 

[jetkami]

Will they ask $60 for it? I hope its priced less then COD just to show them up.

 

[Wagan8r]

This may be my most anticipated video game this year. I never got into Battlefield 1942 nor its subsequent titles, mostly due to my lack of computer hardware and Internet. Then, I bought BF:BC2. It was a steak dinner among a smorgasbord of CoD Happy Meals. It was also the first FPS since Crysis that I felt was made as a PC game. The sound direction still blows my mind with its realism; a feeling that I hadn't felt since the first time I played MoH:AA. I am really hoping for BF3 to take full advantage of modern DX11 GPUs, necessitating my purchase of one! Good luck, BF3 team!

 

[frodough]

RE: Jetkami

"Will they ask $60 for it? I hope its priced less then COD just to show them up. "

BF3 is said to be FREE TO PLAY with a micro transaction system. i assumed it would be free for download but even if it cost money i would jump on this boat simply because this game already seems more promising than Black Ops... o the horrid i already uninstalled that game, it's just weren't the same w/o infinity ward and those who dare to say the graphic got better - please come to your senses and get out of a self-denial.

(owned 1942, BF2 collection, BFBC2)

 

[Wagan8r]

jetkami said:
Will they ask $60 for it? I hope its priced less then COD just to show them up.

No, you can pre-order it now on their website for $50.

EDIT: They seem have updated their site to be $60 now. Must have been a limited time deal.

 

[yRaz]

wagan8r said:

jetkami said:
Will they ask $60 for it? I hope its priced less then COD just to show them up.

No, you can pre-order it now on their website for $50.

EDIT: They seem have updated their site to be $60 now. Must have been a limited time deal.

damn, I really hate buying games for $60...I hope Crysis 2 is $50, but it wont be. What ever the market will bare is a business model I hate.

I hate how that extra $10 was meant to subsidize the price of the console. I paid $1500 for my computer, don't charge me an extra $10 to "subsidize" the price of my computer. It's not like the can pull the piracy excuse since it is almost completely based around online play.

 

[Cota]

Finally a game development for the best gaming system ever.

 

[Guest]

BF2 is more than 5 years old. In 2005 it blew every console FPS.
BF3 will do the same. BF3 will simply rock on PC. Don't ditch PC gamers. PC games (mainly FPS and MMORPG) has always been ahead of console in every way.
It's fine if console gamers are happy with their games, but please realize the fact that those same games on PC are more advanced, because they are not limited by a static technology. PC hardware is not limited to evolve by a 5 years cycle like console!! These are just FACTS, not opinions.

 

[princeton]

frodough said:
"Will they ask $60 for it? I hope its priced less then COD just to show them up. "

BF3 is said to be FREE TO PLAY with a micro transaction system. i assumed it would be free for download but even if it cost money i would jump on this boat simply because this game already seems more promising than Black Ops... o the horrid i already uninstalled that game, it's just weren't the same w/o infinity ward and those who dare to say the graphic got better - please come to your senses and get out of a self-denial.

(owned 1942, BF2 collection, BFBC2)

BF3 will not be free to play. Nowhere has Dice even hinted at that. Don't pass off your hopes as facts.

 

[RaiDeR55]

@frodough Maybe you was thinking of battlefield4free with micro transactions..Bf2 with BC2 weapons.

As others stated above, the PC is always going to be ahead in graphics/Cpu power for gaming.
Looks like the console cycle for refresh is going to be longer than 5 years this time around..PC will be up too DX 13 or 14 by then and some really really fast Gpu's and Mulit cores 12 -16 core cpu's..
Consoles stuck with tri core and Sony's cell cpu for awhile.
SO BF3 should kick some serious A**..Yes that be cool if they did like they did LA Noire for facial expressions. Awesome tech!

 

[Guest]

Comments ripping on console gamers are sad. It isn't a competition. I play Battlefield on the PC and the PS3. Both versions are good, so don't be sad that you can't afford both a PC and a console (or three).

The PC versions are usually more versatile but far less relaxing to play. Often the player is hunched towards the monitor stressing over his K/D ratio. On a console you are chilling on the couch, probably with some friends, eating and laughing at how your moronic friend just killed himself.

Over time I've come to enjoy playing on the console more and more just for that reason. The limited team sizes do annoy us but we can't control that. The comment that console gamers are happy with 24 is untrue. My friend used to be a PC-FPS snob too but now seems to prefer the PS3 version. Not because its better, but because we have awesome flat screens with surround sound and nice couches. I guess if I was playing on a 27-inch screen in my mom's basement I'd probably not feel the same way.

 

[Guest]

Ahhh! I would love to play it on the pc, I just suck/cannot get use to the keyboard and mouse and a controller would be at a disadvantage. Is there any hope for me?

 

[Wagan8r]

Guest said:
Comments ripping on console gamers are sad. It isn't a competition. I play Battlefield on the PC and the PS3. Both versions are good, so don't be sad that you can't afford both a PC and a console (or three).

The PC versions are usually more versatile but far less relaxing to play. Often the player is hunched towards the monitor stressing over his K/D ratio. On a console you are chilling on the couch, probably with some friends, eating and laughing at how your moronic friend just killed himself.

Over time I've come to enjoy playing on the console more and more just for that reason. The limited team sizes do annoy us but we can't control that. The comment that console gamers are happy with 24 is untrue. My friend used to be a PC-FPS snob too but now seems to prefer the PS3 version. Not because its better, but because we have awesome flat screens with surround sound and nice couches. I guess if I was playing on a 27-inch screen in my mom's basement I'd probably not feel the same way.

No one ever said that it was a matter of not being able to afford consoles in addition to a PC. I can afford to buy an XBOX 360 and a PS3, but I'd rather spend that on upgrading my PC, buying games, or buying other electronics. And being "hunched towards the monitor" is more immersive than sitting 5-10 feet away. PCs will always be more powerful and upgradable. That's why we love them.

/story

 

[Guest]

i play on xbox and to say we are happy with 24 players is wrong. i want the best gaming experience i can get. i would accept it if they said the consoles cant handle 64 players, but to say its because were happy with it kind of annoys me. if the game is going to have jets it will need huge maps to accomodate them, if its got huge maps and only 12 on each team its going to be dreadful, youll have half your team in the air, the inevitable sniper *****s not really doing anything, i see entire matches where no flags are captured, this could be the most retarded thing ever. i really hope its more than 24.

 

[Guest]

"For starters, it reportedly features improved lighting elements, with one 'probe' containing more lighting information than an entire level of 2010's Battlefield: Bad Company 2."

What do they mean by "probe"?

"...along with well-balanced character customization that doesn't rely on 'pink rabbit hats.'"

What do they mean by "pink rabbit hats"?

 

[Guest]

it means they aren't going to rely on a bunch of stupid camouflages and face-paints like black ops did to make the game cool.