@Ulf, well said and I agree. None of the Battlefield games have auto-aim, either, which is why they take more skill than your typical COD type game. If the game has auto-aim, then I won't play it. This also really seems to be the plague/scourge of consoles as you don't see FPS games on PC with auto-aim or even aim-assist.
Question I have is why was the title of the article changed and why was it approved that way? The original title is "Battlefield 3 Faces Tough Battle with Cheaters". The submitter changed it to "Cheating Problem Worse in Battlefield 3 than any Call of Duty". Not anywhere in the article does it even state that BF3 is worse than any other COD. In fact, it states that the problem is just a rampant as on COD even saying that "Boosting became the cool thing to do in COD MW...
Exactly! Reviewers who mark their scores way down for the SP campaign just don't understand Battlefield. IT IS A MP GAME! The SP campaign is just a bonus that is there if you want it (or the servers are down). Anyone who buys a BF game for the SP is a fool. Sites that mark it way down for the SP are just as foolish. How can a game that you'll want to play for hundreds of hours only get a score of 6.5?
Worst review ever. A 6.5 is an absolute joke, especially when they give the game a 9 for longevity. Oh, its a terrible game, but you'll want to play it for a long, long time. What kind of crap is that? And only a 5 for gameplay?! Only a 7 for sound?! When it is getting universally praise for both from other sites. This reviewer should really find another job. He's no good at his current one.
@Vladplaya, sorry, but you're an idiot. When a developer states that PC is the leading platform, that means they are developing for the PC first and porting to the consoles. Sometimes, they lead with one of the consoles and then port to the other platforms. They are not stating that the PC is the leading platform sales wise. We all know that consoles are the sales leaders. That is not the point the guy was trying to make. By leading on the PC, he is stating that they were able to make the...
You and me both. A gaming PC + a PS3 makes a great gaming combo.
Another nice review. After 15 reviews, BF3 is sitting at a 93 Metacritic rating. Just outstanding!
http://www.metacritic.com/g...
Another nice review. After 15 reviews, BF3 is sitting at a 93 Metacritic rating. Just outstanding!
http://www.metacritic.com/g...
Especially if you got to try it on PC and play the Caspian Border map. It had none of the technical problems of Op Metro (maybe it was a newer build?) and was a much better representation of what true Battlefield is. I feel sorry for my console brothers who didn't get to experience it. But, have faith: DICE takes feedback seriously and the game is going to be great on all platforms (just like BFBC2).
Yes indeed. I downloaded it earlier and also will be ready at the stroke of midnight. I noticed after the d/l and install, there was an additional 400mb update. Looks like we may have gotten our Day 1 Patch a little early as well.
I bought my PS3 two years ago after the first big price drop (when they introduced the Slim for $299. It makes a great compliment to my PC gaming (more so, I think, than a 360; we PC gamers really don't like the idea of paying extra to access online gaming). PS3 also has some truly great exclusive games unavailable on the PC. I believe the PS3 and a gaming PC makes for an awesome gaming combo!
My prediction is, yes, MW3 will outsell BF3. However, I think BF3 will outsell MW3 on PC because PC gamers appreciate the extra effort DICE is putting into our version. Meanwhile, the COD franchise has gone seriously downhill on PC since MW1. MW3 will still outsell BF3 overall and on consoles, but I really think BF3 will post more sales on PC than MW3.
*Also, there's an outside chance BF3 will do better than MW3 on PS3. If, they get smart enough and protest being treated...
I've already voted.....with my wallet. Preordered BF3 on Amazon and only $42 to boot! Let's see. A game that is employing a new engine and taking upwards of 5 years to develop vs a game with a rehashed engine, no innovation and with only 2 years of development time (not to mention 3 developers on the project: too many cooks in the kitchen?). BF3 is day one for me while MW3 is a "wait and see".
Wow, what a great before and after comparison. Oh my, less than a week to go! BF3 is going to be EPIC!
I also noticed that FIFA 12 (EA) wasn't even on the list, but Winning Eleven 2012 (Konami) is third. Are the Japanese also forgoing the superior soccer game (FIFA 12, by most reviews, is clearly better) just because it isn't made by a Japanese company? If true, then that is truly sad.
IGN forgot a couple of other innovations. Persistent stat tracking and unlockable weapons were both introduced in BF2 and are now staples of the FPS genre.
I didn't find it nearly as bad as the author; plus, I think the author is confusing Origin with Battlelog. Origin is only really used to launch Battlelog and, then, Battlelog is used to launch into a game. Most of the problems he listed concerned the Battlelog side of things: the section titled "An Inauspicious Debut" in particular (matchmaking, stat keeping, etc.).
Only a couple of times at the beginning. Then, it became a 360 vs PC show.
Kind of tells me that we're ready for the next generation of consoles. Crysis is a 2007 game and the current consoles can barely play it (still looks better on a PC with low settings). BF3 is another one that is really showing the age of this console generation. I understand how a lot people want to hang on and stretch this generation out even longer; money is tight. However, the longer this goes on, the bigger these differences are going to become.
Either way would be go...
Or you can just own both: I have a gaming PC and a PS3. Having both is the best of both worlds and I rarely miss a game that I want to play. The majority of my time is on the PC, but I have the PS3 to play the occasional console only game or one of Sony's great exclusives. I'd also get a 360, but MS doesn't have nearly as many exclusives that I'm interested in. So, getting a 360 isn't very cost efficient for me (paying a yearly fee doesn't help things either). However,...