Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Battlefield3-wishlist., How do you want the game to be?
BearH
post 9 Aug 2010, 12:13
Post #1


Major
Group: Members
Clan: .:SoR
Clan role: CL3

BF2: BearH.HisOne
BF BC2: BearH.HisOne



source: http://www.1up.com/do/previewPage?cId=3180750
written by By Thierry Nguyen @1up.com


SPECULATION: What We Want For Battlefield 3

Battlefield 3, long rumored, is finally on its way. We always assumed DICE was secretly tinkering with this while making the Battlefield Bad Company series, and while there's been off-the-cuff remarks from ex-DICE personnel, EA itself hasn't formally acknowledged the game until last week's announcement of the BF3 beta being bundled with the limited edition of Medal of Honor. But that's all that's been said about it -- so we're still pretty much in the dark as to what we'll get with Battlefield 3.
All we know is that BF3 seems to be a multi-platform release (by virtue of being bundled with Medal of Honor), so it will not only be on PC, but also on PS3 and 360. That, and it's likely to use the Frostbite 2.0 engine (as good as Bad Company 2 was, it was still technically Frostbite one-point-something). So it's safe to expect even more destructible terrain, and perhaps better tools for supporting more user-mods on PC. But what else do we actually want in it? In basic terms: a delightful blend of Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 2. Basically, we want the aesthetics and destruction of BC2 with the scope and scale of BF2. At the moment, we're going to roll with a near-future setting; even though BC2 does a pretty good job with the modern-to-future gear, we'd like those aesthetics to be brought into a deeper and more interesting game in BF3. Anyhow, here are some more of our humble suggestions to DICE.






More players: First off, let's bring back the idea of 64 or more players in a BF match. BF2 demonstrated that absolute madness and memories come about from jamming tons of people onto a map and watching chaos ensue, and the 24-player limit of BC2 pales in comparison to the best of BF2. MAG has shown that it's possible to do 256 players in a single session on a console, so BF3 needs to step up its player numbers. I realize it's unreasonable to ask for 256 players plus fully destructible environments, but surely we can get a decent chunk more than BC2's 24, and still maintain fidelity in demolition.

More classes: BC2 (and, well, Battlefield 2142) streamlined BF2's seven classes into just four. Rather than a simplified, four-guys-who-are-kind-of-decent-at-multiple-skills, let's go back to highly focused and defined classes. Re-separate sniper and spec-ops. Take BC2's engineer and reverse-engineer him back into an engineer and an anti-tank guy. And reward players who stick to one kit with a bigger set of focused tools and abilities. Have players get a better sense of role and identity, rather than the "I can do this and that" that you feel with BC2. While we're at it, bring back more factions and equipment -- we actually miss playing as the MEC during BC2.

More real estate: BF2 was famous for having varied map sizes based on player-count. So, in BF3, you can have your tight map for a 16-person game, and when the player count reaches 32, the map can grow to reveal more of the island you're fighting on. And when you hit 64, the entire island becomes playable. In BF2, a map could be measured in square kilometers that took considerable time to hoof across. And that sheer distance adds more gameplay variety than the "fighting down a straight corridor" method of BC2 -- you can have a better sense of multiple fronts, or individual squads carrying out flanking tactics to support a big main push, and so forth. One idea we have is that the maps are so damn big that they have crazy diverse regions within. Think of a 64-player match on a map where a city is surrounded by dense jungle, or a snow-covered mountain overlooking a forest. Essentially, a map so big that it feels like two distinct BC2 maps put into one large chunk of real estate.

More vehicles: To complement the massive map size, let's get back to having something like 30-plus vehicles of all kinds. Why limit the game to light tanks and jeeps? Let's have APCs and boats and gunships. Let's have multiple types of heavy tanks. Bring back the glory days of coordinating vehicle rides to cross the expansive maps. Heck, let's bring back jets. Air power shouldn't just be helicopters -- BF3 could herald the glorious return of F-15s and the A10 while also adding things like the AC130 or a B2. Sure, people will still invariably suck at piloting them, but man alive, the ability to pound the map with 105mm howitzers will make up for lackluster pilots.






More command: With all the craziness going on, it's time to bring back the Commander. Have a player call the big shots for his team out in the field. Have him survey the map, and perform his BF2 duties of calling in bigger artillery, dropping in supplies, and using radar to guide everyone. But in addition, let's give him more cool tasks. How about calling in (and guiding) a cruise missile? Or maybe designating squad deployment areas -- so that individual soldiers can opt to either spawn on top of their squad like in BC2, or jump into one of the Commander's designated spot.

More tracking: In light of all the new toys and activities we're asking for, it'd make sense to up the stat tracking. BC2 does a pretty nice job, but with all the weapons, vehicles, and commander actions, it's time to adopt a detailed-MMO-level approach to stat tracking. Dogtags, pins, unlocks, kills, streaks, support actions -- have it all feed into some sort of "Encyclopedia Battlefieldia."

More modes: The Bad Company series did a great job of adding more modes on top of the traditional conquest. Rush and Onslaught, adapted for a game of BF2's scale, would be welcome. But let's not forget everything about BF2142. In principle, the Titan mode where teams would breach and destroy a mobile base, could still work. Maybe it gets converted into storming roving battleships or floating fortresses. But basically, in case you haven't gotten the point by now, we're hoping that DICE just cherry picks the best stuff from Battlefield and Bad Company and blends them into one crazy uber-package with BF3. As a bonus for the more visually minded, here's a "charticle" version of this story. What would you want to see in Battlefield 3?


Thought that I should set up this thread for us that is awaiting this game. How does the battle.no -community that BF3 should be like when it will be released?

(Kind of an continuation of Daxmans thread in the news-section, but with a focus on a "wishlist" for BF3. The article at the top is ment as an inspiration for our own thoughts about the game.)

Let the debate begin! wink.png

ADDON:

What BF3 Needs:
64 players or higher (at least 48 on consoles, less if bandwidth is an issue)

BF2-sized maps, or even larger

Server browser on all platforms

Pilot-able Jets with proper physics, balance, hitboxes and high flight ceiling(same goes for choppers)

Mod tools on PC

Conquest as MAIN mode (if Rush is included, don't make maps designed for Rush because they will not port over to Conquest well. Instead have Conquest maps ported to Rush and other modes)

Battlerecorder for PC (consoles if possible)

Photomode (especially for consoles, with an improved system < Link)

Spectator Mode

Playable tutorials that teach basics + teamplay (do not have to be mandatory)

Commanders and Squad Leaders

Holdable knife that does not auto-lock (with working hit detection, like BF2)

Bots on all platforms (All MP maps playable with bots, like offline practice mode. Killzone 2 does this)

Detailed in-game/post-round stats on all platforms (BC2 fails to have SPM, Time, and Squad Stats post-round)

Private servers (4 players minimum on consoles, less if possible. Maybe even P2P to allow low player count)

In-depth clan features

Reasonable weapon damage (depends on many factors. same as BF2/2142 or a bit lower)

At least 3 Factions

Prone (This is up to DICE based on balance/issues with destruction, just no dolphin diving)

Bullet drop

Improved Collision Detection for vehicles (roadkilling needs to be accurate, and hitting someone with a fast vehicle should send them flying)

Real ragdoll physics instead of death animations (detonating C4 next to an enemy should send them flying)

Friendly fire for all standard ranked servers, with a good punish/kick system (Not just Hardcore, if there is Hardcore)

Classic Battlefield Music style

Realistic accuracy at long ranges (No more sniping with SMGs, BC1 got this right with bullet spread at long ranges)

Wide selection of weapons, some being faction specific (more unlocks than BF2)

Commo Rose similar to BF2's, possibly improved

Very long draw distance with engine-rendered mountains/background (not simply backdrop images)

Volumetric clouds and sky system (like in Crysis)

Working VOIP with multiple com. channels (Squad Leader com. channel to coordinate squads to work as a single unit. Commander can coordinate in SL channel and to each individual squad)

Ability to see what squad everybody is in on your team (EDIT: instead of named squads, just have a page in the in-game menu that shows every squad and who's in them)

Choice to "bleed out" and skip being revived

Max of 6 players per squad (Make it like BC2 where you can have as many squads as there are players on your team, but 6 people per squad max. There should be no set squads that everyone joins in the beginning of the match like Killzone 2 for instance, you should be able to create and manage your own squad.)

Proper chopper missile damage (similar to BF2's)

5 or more classes (preferably same/similar structure to BF2)

Assault rifles for Medics instead of LMGs

Wrench instead of power drill



What BF3 Does Not Need: (mostly opinions)
Singleplayer (other than tutorials and offline practice mode with bots)

A variety of game modes, 3-4 and a co-op survival mode would be enough (Conquest, Capture the Flag, TDM, and maybe Rush)

Perks (Weapon add-ons and some level of customization are welcome, but no "Specializations" like BC2)

The ability to bail from any vehicles destroyed by explosives

UAV like BC2's

Killcam (This is up to DICE. I wouldn't mind a killcam that just replayed your death in 3rd person, slow mo and followed your killer for a few seconds)

Overhead Red Dots (Also up to DICE, I would prefer only mini-map spotting)

Regenerating health (let the Medic provide health, has always worked well in BF)

Infinite sprint (Up to DICE, but I personally could live without it)

High points system (preferably have smaller numbers like BF2 or BC1)

RPG-7, why not use a more modern version?

Motion sensors

All class weapons

Unlimited chopper/tank ammunition (limited like BF2s, ability to resupply in specific places, but not instantly)



Other Cool Stuff:
Dynamic weather and time of day (if possible, on PC have these adjustable for every map in server options)

Smoke as Default for tanks (no specializations for vehicles please, it's simply not needed)

The ability to cook grenades

Ability to select Firing Modes

Ability to stay in scope after firing sniper rifle

A few ammo boxes scattered across every map (needing to rely on teammates for ammo always can get frustrating)

Beach invasion map (with deployable tank perhaps?)

Wake Island Remake (preferably on day one )

Deep Naval Warfare, with multiple different boats

Ability to dive just below the surface of the water to hide yourself (while underwater you can only stay for a few seconds, and need to recharge your breath to go again. whether you can be killed underwater is up to DICE)

Claymores

Grappling Hook and Ziplines(lol, would actually be pretty cool and useful gadgets)

Binoculars

Man-portable air-defense systems (MPADS)

Tow-able vehicles (like in BF:V with choppers)

Ability to lean (not sure how this would be incorporated, Killzone 2/3 do this though)

3D Support (not "gimmicky" 3D, but 3D that works well with the game)

True weapon feedback (like this)

Dedicated Guided Anti-tank launcher (like SRAW/Eryx in BF2, Javelin that cant take out air vehicles)

Night vision goggles for nighttime maps

Increase TOW/KORNET speed (but not too much)

Class limitation (a set number of people could be a certain class, just a thought)

Ability to create extremely deep craters with explosives


//BearH

This post has been edited by BearH': 17 Aug 2010, 13:56


--------------------

QUOTE
Fly gutta som er på Oman er en del dårligere enn de på Dalian syns jeg da, etter 451 timer public på Oman. :ninja: Derfor jeg henviste Dalian pilotene som Leet Pilots. ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JihadNorge
post 9 Aug 2010, 16:32
Post #2


Kvartermester
Group: Members
Clan role: Being hungover

BF2: kalle_von_afrika
BF BC2: JihadNorge



No snipers plx.

2guns.gif Sniper[GER]


--------------------
No combat ready unit has ever passed inspection.

No inspection ready unit has ever passed combat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
UltimaSRi
post 9 Aug 2010, 16:55
Post #3


Fenrik
Group: Members
Clan: Soldiers of Resurrection
Clan role: Rekrutt befal/Drill Sargeant

BF2: UltimaSRi



QUOTE (JihadNorge @ 9 Aug 2010, 17:32) *
No snipers plx.

2guns.gif Sniper[GER]

Snipers!! just add wind and pressure(air) and snipers will have sum additional challenges.

Classes are stupid; you are a soldier.. here is a whole lot of equipment, gear up yerself. Extra weight means loss of pace/stamina.
AT hit on a tank disables ea. belts, optics or turret.
A bullet hit in yer legs slows u down or make U fall until a medic fixes you up.
SpecOp diving equipment.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tamx
post 9 Aug 2010, 17:42
Post #4


Kvartermester
Group: Banned
Clan: Virtual Gaming
Clan role: <3




QUOTE (UltimaSRi @ 9 Aug 2010, 17:55) *
AT hit on a tank disables ea. belts, optics or turret.
A bullet hit in yer legs slows u down or make U fall until a medic fixes you up.
SpecOp diving equipment.


Just no.


--------------------

      #virtual-gaming.org @quakenet

    Dusjliners: Andy, Blower, Joachim, Nefne & Tamx
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ldd1
post 9 Aug 2010, 17:51
Post #5


Løytnant
Group: Members



Lets just hope they dont make it to realistic.
I hope they make it easy, not to advanced. Bf2 updated, on quake engine would be awesome, but will never happen:(


--------------------
"Hope tout Manchester fanatik Etazini ap mouri nan SIDA"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AndreasV8
post 9 Aug 2010, 18:07
Post #6


Kaptein
Group: Members
Clan role: TheFragZor

BF2: NorwegianAndy
BF BC2: AnDy666



Everyone want bf2 with better graphics and less bugs
easie
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Larsffs
post 9 Aug 2010, 18:12
Post #7


Fenrik
Group: Members



QUOTE (UltimaSRi @ 9 Aug 2010, 16:55) *
Classes are stupid; you are a soldier.. here is a whole lot of equipment, gear up yerself. Extra weight means loss of pace/stamina.
AT hit on a tank disables ea. belts, optics or turret.
A bullet hit in yer legs slows u down or make U fall until a medic fixes you up.
SpecOp diving equipment.


My question is, do we need another militarysimulator? If people want ultrarealistic games, then why just stick to ArmA 2/AA/PR or some s**t. Games aren't fun if they are too realistic, in my opinion. One of the most successful FPS-games in history are Counter Strike, Quake, BF1942/2 and CoD-series. These games aren't realistic at all, but the gameplay is awesome and makes the games fun to play.
Besides the destruction-part, Frostbite is an aweful game engine. Laggy, not customized for competitive gaming, and demands alot from your computer. You need a state of the art computer to run a game with this engine smoothly.

My point is, the Battlefield-games has always been about good gameplay. But with the things you suggested, you've suddenly turned BF into a high-end militarysimulator. Not a good game in my opinion, unless you are a militaryfreak who only cares about realism.


--------------------
Grammar is important. Capitalization is the difference between helping your Uncle Jack off a horse & helping your uncle jack off a horse.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Senapsburk
post 9 Aug 2010, 19:06
Post #8


Major
Group: Members
BF2: Senapsburk[SWE]



Battle.no have direct connections to DICE and I guess Battle.no will get Beta keys.
Bazajaytee from DICE has his own special Battle.no account (link) with status DICE Admiral.

If memory does not serve me wrong Bazajaytee from DICE, actually asked for feedback during beta testing of BF2 patch 1.5???. It would be nice to see something similar for Battlefield 3, maybe an public official wishlist thread. It would for sure get this forum going again. Of course we can still debate what will make Battlefield 3 great, but wouldn’t it be better if our ideas actually meant something?


--------------------
Need some nice relaxing music while playing? check out -> http://der-real.de/music/
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
OlsTer
post 9 Aug 2010, 20:07
Post #9


Brigader
Group: Members



Gi meg BF 3 uten snipere... Men det er større sjanse for at jeg får Nobels Fredspris!!!


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aleksanders
post 9 Aug 2010, 20:25
Post #10


Kaptein
Group: Members
Clan: |DiaR|
Clan role: Public wh0re

BF2: aleksanders / aLx
BF BC2: Pepsi-Max



Jeg vil nå si at et skytespill uten Sniper-Kit er ikke et skytespill.

Jeg elsker sniper i alle skytespill som jeg spiller, BF2, Cod4, BC2, CS, CSS.

Kommer BF3 uten sniper, så kjøper ikke jeg det.
Og i tillegg treffer bedre med sniper enn alle andre kit. 5000 poeng med sniper i BC2 med bare kills, np,np.

Edit: No sniper in BF3, not a game for me happy.png

This post has been edited by aleksanders: 9 Aug 2010, 21:01
Reason for edit: Leif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
magnus1987
post 9 Aug 2010, 21:11
Post #11


Kvartermester
Group: Members
Clan: [BOB] (vennegjeng)
Clan role: kosebamsen

BF2: Sjefen_Magnus/Skogens_Konge



Jeg vil ha helikopter happy.png
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kleggen7
post 9 Aug 2010, 22:29
Post #12


Menig
Group: Members
Clan: low level gaming (LL)
Clan role: ins

BF2: the_cruel_one & kleggen7



så lenge det er flere spillere en på bc2 og fly, så kjøper jeg det... så lenge de ikke finner på og ødelegge det med og ta vekk snipere og sånn, det må være med, bare litt vanskeligere....


--------------------
jeg tror på himmelen, for den kan jeg se.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JihadNorge
post 9 Aug 2010, 22:54
Post #13


Kvartermester
Group: Members
Clan role: Being hungover

BF2: kalle_von_afrika
BF BC2: JihadNorge



Da kan de lage et eget spill,bare for snipere. Feks,helt firkanta map med 32 eller 64 busker. Så kan de sitte der og lukte på blomster eller hva fan de nå gjør.
Og et skikkelig spill til oss som kan å bruke WASD til noe annet enn å gå til første busk.


--------------------
No combat ready unit has ever passed inspection.

No inspection ready unit has ever passed combat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kalinox
post 9 Aug 2010, 23:52
Post #14


Løytnant
Group: Members
Clan: Valhall
Clan role: Leader

BF2: Kalinox



No classes
Let each player make his choice before or on (see below) the battlefield.

Credits / Economy
Let the players earn credits as the play (remember CS).
The credits would be used to buy both gear and hardware.
The battle would then have a natural progression of deployment.
It would also remove the option to have an entire team using the same weapons at all times (ex. sniper rifles).

To ensure some hw on the map at the start of a round, some players of each team are given, at random, a Free Hardware card.
The higher your rank, the higher the multiplier at which you earn credits would be.

No shockpaddles / no resurrection
The shockpaddles should be removed.
Replaced by medical aid, which reduces that soldiers next spawn delay.

Instanced worlds
A wast battlefield (as Bear suggested) but instanced into several maps.
You might begin the campaign (mp) at the shore, progressing on through the forrest, over the mountain and into the desert.
While in any of these maps, you could look beyond the current playfield and see your path of destruction.
It would work more or less like RUSH do in BC2, but instead of bases it would be maps.
To make the world a bit more dynamic, the attackers could choose from several objectives to attack on each map.
Each objective would "open" the next area/map for the next game.

So a give scenario could be:
The attackers arrive at the shore. They can choose to attack the guardpost leading into the forrest or try to head for the factory on the outskirt of a city.
The factory being successfully captured the round ends and the next game takes place in the city.
Similar choices could be made for each map, but in the end they would all take them to the same final map.

------------------------_______[Suburbs]______[Mountain pass]___
---------_____[City]----------------|-----______/--------------------------\
[Shore]___ ___---- ______[Village]______-----------------------------[Desert Oasis]______[Desert Stronghold]
--------------[Forrest]__________________\---------------------------/
-------------------------------------------------------[Mountain foot]____/

Upon reaching the final map (Desert Stronghold) the host chould choose whether to start the same campaign over again reversing the roles of the two teams or to start another campaign.

To increase the difficulty a bit; the capture of some region would be beneficial to the attackers and vice versa for the defenders.
Lets say the defenders get a reduction to hardware prices or respawn delay. Giving them a slight advantage over the attackers.
The defenders' airbase is located in the forrest. If the attackers were to enter the forrest, taking out their aribase, the cost / or respawn delay would be increased for airplanes by the same amount it was reduced with at the begining of the campaign.
At the same time the defenders' armored vehicle HQ is located in the city. Taking it out would result in the same penalty for the defenders' armored vehicles.

The attackers then have to make a choice: "Which base is the most valuable to capture, and will benefit them the most later on in their campaign?"
Taking on the Mountain pass, it might be better to cripple the defenders' armored vehicles, while the mountain foot would be easier to defend using air support.

This is just an exampe of one campaign; the posibilities are many.


Troop transport
Remove the instant spawn on squad leaders or members.
Bring back the value of troop transport.

Destruction
Destruction on both sides of the size scale could be improved.
A small hole in a wall, just to look through it to the other side or a giant crater big enough to block a path for smaller vehicles.


Some movement issues
Rolls: 2xtapping one of the movement keys would make the character do a roll in that direction.
Ex. "DD" would make the character throw himself to the right.

Cover system: An action button which enables your character to take better cover behind obstacles.
Ex. Push up against a wall corner to look or shoot around it.


Female soldier
Bring on some female soldiers.
THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS - DISCRIMINATION ON A TOTALY UNACCEPTABLE LEVEL! hehe XD

Character creation
Could be nice to personalize your character a bit.

Environmental forces
If you made long range projectiles affected by environmental forces like wind and rain, you might see a decrease in the amount of snipers.
Dont make forces such as wind a constant force, but make room for gusts and direction changes. Make the environment feedback this to the player.
Ex. Light things like the leaves on trees and dust on the ground could follow the same forces. As the sniper prepares his shot, he has to keep an eye on the motion of the trees or dust on the ground.
If the gusts are too frequent and irregular he might just put his rifle away, or he could improve his skills and become one of the few who could deal with such weather.


The attributes that make up such winds should be random, so that winds would rarely be the same on the same map.

edit:

And please make heavy armored vehicles like tanks feel heavy when you drive them.
Don't let a 1" branch stop a 70 000kg tank.

And it would be really cool if destroyed hardware remained on the battlefield, so that infantry can use them as cover.
You could blow them away with generous amounts of C4 if they block off a vital path.

This post has been edited by Kalinox: 10 Aug 2010, 14:47
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BearH
post 10 Aug 2010, 06:30
Post #15


Major
Group: Members
Clan: .:SoR
Clan role: CL3

BF2: BearH.HisOne
BF BC2: BearH.HisOne



We've seen that many of you just want a remake of BF2 with destruction 2.0
I partially agree with you myself, but I think that would be the minimum of what we should expect.
Below is a ninja-quote from an article @eurogamer, which points out some good arguments on what would make a good BF3.

Outlined in red is AlfaOmega for a long lifespan of the game.

[start quote]
What is it that made BF2 such a hit with gamers?

Below is a partial list of those features. Essentially this table represents the minimum Dice needs to achieve to make BF3 stand on-par with BF2 (note that many of these features are missing from BC2):


BF2 Key Feature Set / The Minimum Feature Set for BF3 Feature

64 max players/Working VOIP
Non-linear maps, flank and attack viable /Commo rose and order rose
Dedicated servers /Competitive requirements such as PBSS, Spectate, Demo recording, clanmods
Ranked and unranked servers /User-made maps
Users can host their own servers / Lan support /Commanders
Ability to lock a squad and invite people in. /Squad leaders
RCON support /Wide range of vehicles, including jets
Ability to kick from a squad /User-made mods


But the above list of features would just be a minimum, or to put it another way would simply be recreating BF2, which kind of defeats the whole idea of releasing a new game. We can however assume one additional feature of the new game, and that is that Dice will use its Frostbite engine. This engine has been used in Bad Company 2 and will be used, albeit in a more rudimentary form, in the upcoming Medal of Honor reboot due out this October. It'll be in BF3, and the huge step forward that represents in and of itself will be enough for many of us to be happy with the new game.

[end quote]
The whole article:

http://www.eurogamers.eu/v2/euro-gamers-bl...ll-be-a-success



Whitout this [Competitive requirements such as PBSS, Spectate, Demo recording, clanmods], the game imo would fade out and last nearly a year after release.
Both public and competitive gaming will benefit from the above feature.

PBSS, spectate and demo-rec would benefit from more cheater-free server, and then again more "competitive" public-play.
The above + clanmods will surely keep the clanscene going equal to what BF2 have had.
+ Demo-rec would most likely engage those filmmakers which imo is a part of the community that keeps a game going.

//BearH


--------------------

QUOTE
Fly gutta som er på Oman er en del dårligere enn de på Dalian syns jeg da, etter 451 timer public på Oman. :ninja: Derfor jeg henviste Dalian pilotene som Leet Pilots. ;)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Luuft
post 10 Aug 2010, 11:23
Post #16


Løytnant
Group: Members
Clan: Victrix Legion



Skal vel sies at for det meste alt av det Kalinox nevner ligger i ArmA.
Spent på DICE sine valg ihvertfall.. De overrasker hver gang, positivt og negativt.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AndreasV8
post 10 Aug 2010, 14:16
Post #17


Kaptein
Group: Members
Clan role: TheFragZor

BF2: NorwegianAndy
BF BC2: AnDy666



Hvis folk har lyst på en krigs simulator så reis til Afghanistan med en G3 og skyt deg selv i foten.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kalinox
post 10 Aug 2010, 14:40
Post #18


Løytnant
Group: Members
Clan: Valhall
Clan role: Leader

BF2: Kalinox



Why shouldn't DiCE look to Arma in order to improve their own product?
Games always "steal" from older games, this is a known fact.
If they do choose to use it, they have to adapt and shape it to their own needs, which best fit their game.

This post has been edited by Kalinox: 10 Aug 2010, 14:40
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AndreasV8
post 10 Aug 2010, 14:47
Post #19


Kaptein
Group: Members
Clan role: TheFragZor

BF2: NorwegianAndy
BF BC2: AnDy666



They wouldn't improve anything by stealing things from Arma.
if they make a realistic battlefield game then they will kill the series.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Luuft
post 10 Aug 2010, 16:10
Post #20


Løytnant
Group: Members
Clan: Victrix Legion



so why don't you/others just play arma instead? as andy said; i think they'll kill the series if they do it. Its not the "typical" bf.

This post has been edited by Luftskudd: 10 Aug 2010, 16:11
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd November 2017 - 09:27
Public TeamSpeak : speak.battle.no | Forum : forum.battle.no
Join the volunteer TV2 Battle.no team.