Battlefield 3

Unfocused said:
Don't know about here, but in BF2 you could die "fully" from some explosives (like artillery, a direct tank shell or SRAW missile, probably C4 if you were right next to it).

Does it still count as a death if you get "killed" and then revived in BF3? In BF2 it was an additional reason to stay together and play as a squad - not only did squadmates have a better experience, but they could enjoy better stats as well, if they were reviving each other. I didn't like how they deviated from that in BC2.
Click to expand...
It refunds your respawn token in BC2 so reviving helps the team.
 
Oh god no it's not realistic in the least.

acepilotf14_1317868694.jpg
 
the AEK might be my new favourite weapon right now, just love the feel of a weapon that doesn't have as much kickback as the M416 whilst also being a lot less noisier. got some lovely range to it, too.
 
Vegeta897 said:
Troll some more. Like I said, this puzzled me since BF2. I got BF2 long before I started playing the arma series, or even knew about it.
Click to expand...
Because it makes the game fun. It allows everyone who dies due to conventional means (read: bullets) to be eligible for revive.
 
I get that, but it's up for debate that it 'makes the game fun'. I mean, you can already respawn on your squad leader, putting you right back into the action, and I'm not saying that getting shot and downed with a chance for revive should be taken out entirely. You know what isn't fun? Mowing down 3 guys and filling their corpses with bullets, only to have them all revived if you look away for 5 seconds. That's frustrating, even if it might be convenient for the players getting revived. There's a balance between fun for one side and frustrating or cheap for another, and I think this mechanic is a bit out of balance. Just my opinion.

This has absolutely nothing to do with realism. It's more of a fairness thing. Just like, if I do something in a game, and something else happens that I do not expect or believe shouldn't happen. If I shoot somebody in the head and shoot them 5 more times in the head after they're dead on the ground, I don't expect them to be able to get back up. That's not a demand made by a realism nut.
 
well, in the beta so far you can only perform one revive on someone, or at least for the first minute or so since they get up. i've revived people, have them get up then go straight back down again (BECAUSE YOU ARE STANDING UP IN A SNIPER-FRIENDLY FIELD AND NOT USING THE WALL FOR COVER LIKE I AM, YOU DOLT) and it hasn't let me revive, so that's half way towards your point i guess? but don't worry veg, no one revives in the BF3 beta anyway, so if you were to play you'd find it alright.

seriously, no one revives. i must of been revived a grand total of five times in all of the six days i've been playing. it's as if people don't know it's available to them. i'm a ****ing reviving machine when i'm playing, **** killing people just give me another medic pack in place of my gun and i'd be happy playing the pacifist. seriously!
 
Limits like that sound like a good idea. I still think you should be able to kill someone who is downed D:
 
Vegeta897 said:
I get that, but it's up for debate that it 'makes the game fun'. I mean, you can already respawn on your squad leader, putting you right back into the action, and I'm not saying that getting shot and downed with a chance for revive should be taken out entirely. You know what isn't fun? Mowing down 3 guys and filling their corpses with bullets, only to have them all revived if you look away for 5 seconds. That's frustrating, even if it might be convenient for the players getting revived. There's a balance between fun for one side and frustrating or cheap for another, and I think this mechanic is a bit out of balance. Just my opinion.

This has absolutely nothing to do with realism. It's more of a fairness thing. Just like, if I do something in a game, and something else happens that I do not expect or believe shouldn't happen. If I shoot somebody in the head and shoot them 5 more times in the head after they're dead on the ground, I don't expect them to be able to get back up. That's not a demand made by a realism nut.
Click to expand...
So which rules are this expectation based on - the rules of the game or the rules of real life? :p
 
I don't know, real life and every other game out there I guess? In before "so because every other game does it that way, we have to conform, man?"

I can't tell if you're joking or not, because it's a really simple point I'm trying to make. You shoot bullets at people to kill them. You shoot rockets at tanks to blow them up. What if instead of blowing up, rockets made tanks turn purple? That's certainly unexpected. I'm sure everyone would be against this feature. Not because it's unrealistic, but because it's just not what the **** makes any sense god damn.
 
Vegeta897 said:
I don't know, real life and every other game out there I guess? In before "so because every other game does it that way, we have to conform, man?"

I can't tell if you're joking or not, because it's a really simple point I'm trying to make. You shoot bullets at people to kill them. You shoot rockets at tanks to blow them up. What if instead of blowing up, rockets made tanks turn purple? That's certainly unexpected. I'm sure everyone would be against this feature. Not because it's unrealistic, but because it's just not what the **** makes any sensegod damn.
Click to expand...
Your point doesn't make any sense because it's a slippery slope. Okay, bullets kill, so you want headshots to equal permanent death. Where's the gore? Does the soldier have a name and a family? Why do players respawn after a set amount of time? Why don't you have to use two control inputs for every finger gripping your gun to really get a proper sense of how to micromanage recoil? Why do the tanks respawn too?

You say "This has absolutely nothing to do with realism. It's more of a fairness thing." But you never actually say why it's unfair - it merely isn't symmetric with your expectations, which are based in non-game reality, as you've said yourself.
 
Stigmata said:
Your point doesn't make any sense because it's a slippery slope.
Click to expand...
So is the 'to make it fun, to make it so players don't have to wait to respawn' argument. You could skew it either way.

Stigmata said:
Okay, bullets kill, so you want headshots to equal permanent death. Where's the gore? Does the soldier have a name and a family? Why do players respawn after a set amount of time? Why don't you have to use two control inputs for every finger gripping your gun to really get a proper sense of how to micromanage recoil? Why do the tanks respawn too?
Click to expand...
Apparently you ignored the part where I said it's about finding a good balance. I think that this feature leans too far in one direction.

Stigmata said:
You say "This has absolutely nothing to do with realism. It's more of a fairness thing." But you never actually say why it's unfair - it merely isn't symmetric with your expectations, which are based in non-game reality, as you've said yourself.
Click to expand...
I tried to demonstrate why I think it's too much with my example scenario.

Maybe I should try rewording the realism thing: I'm not saying this because I like realism in games. I'm not looking for realism in BF3. I've done enough ranting about that subject already.

Hell, even one of my most played missions in Arma features a revive mechanic in which you never can actually fully die, whether you're shot or blown up. Certainly not realistic, but I don't care because it works with the gameplay. It's not like the enemy AI is going to get frustrated. And on another level, it's not as easy to revive someone in Arma as it is in BF2, where you can just run up and shock paddle them. It's all about balancing the fun vs. difficulty.
 
I was always under the impression that the revive thing (although knowing very little about the history of Battlefield pre-BF2, I'm probably wrong) was based on realism (other than giving the medic something else to do), in response to games like, say, CS. It's rare in average combat (i.e. medium- to long-range) that you going to die instantly from being shot from small arms in non-nervous system areas. Death from bullets almost invariably involves bleeding to death, which can be lengthened or stopped by medics. The principle causes of your body going limp in a battle (other than actual instant death) is passing out from compression blasts, shock, or blood loss. From which medics can bring you back with relative ease (epinephrine is a hell of a drug).

This is in contrast to CS's 'shoot me in the foot 3 times and I do a full John-Woo-slowmo-backflip-instant-rigor-mortis death.'

Of course, as people have pointed out, using defibrillators to restart people's hearts after getting shot (?!?!) kicks this notion in the nuts. So maybe my idea is full of shit :V
 
Vegeta897 said:
So is the 'to make it fun, to make it so players don't have to wait to respawn' argument. You could skew it either way.


Apparently you ignored the part where I said it's about finding a good balance. I think that this feature leans too far in one direction.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I did jump the gun there. But I'm not taking issue with your conclusion, I'm taking issue with your reasoning. You just haven't given a compelling reason to think paddle revives are inherently unfair, other than you once killed three people and then looked away and were then shot by them. I know you were being facetious, but if it were a real case you should have simply been more aware of the Medic's mechanics, or adapted your future strategy so as to not give enemy Medics the opportunity to revive everyone you just killed.

Is it balanced right now? No, probably not. But "I don't like it" isn't an imbalance. As far as balance and fairness are concerned, the rules of every game exist self-contained in a vacuum. What's fair in one game is only fair because of how it affects every other rule in that game, and no others.
 
Well, I just found it frustrating at times because it was as if groups of enemies were this vicious bacteria that could constantly reproduce until you wiped out every last one of them. (A decent squad will keep their medic(s) protected to keep reviving, and an even better squad will pick up the kits of dead medics to keep the reviving going)

I also found it just strange or odd that you can't spray a corpse with any effect at all. Just doesn't feel good.

So those are the 2 cons to the system. Here are the pros:

Getting killed doesn't mean you're taken out of the action. You can get revived if your squad is together. This reduces the time you have to wait, or time you have to spend travelling back into the fight.

It makes medics a more important role.


---


Now, what I'm saying is that the cons outweigh the pros. I think some simple modifications to the system would eliminate the cons and keep the pros fairly intact.

Being able to be instantly killed at a distance would be rare. I'd even be in favor of headshots not being one hit instant perma-deaths. Nobody likes to be killed instantly like that. But, what's the harm in being able to kill a body that has been downed? If my enemy took the time to walk up to my corpse, or spend the extra time and ammo to make sure I was dead, he damn well deserves the kill. And if I was smart, I was in a position that was behind cover, so that if I go down, my body is no longer visible to him to finish me off. Perfect, I can be revived because I was playing smart. My enemies can wipe me and my squad out if they put forth the necessary effort. Everyone's happy.

You look at me in the eyes and tell me that system would be worse than the current one.
 
Vegeta897 said:
If I shoot somebody in the head and shoot them 5 more times in the head after they're dead on the ground, I don't expect them to be able to get back up.
Click to expand...

I think you have anger issues.
 
Vegeta897 said:
Well, I just found it frustrating at times because it was as if groups of enemies were this vicious bacteria that could constantly reproduce until you wiped out every last one of them. (A decent squad will keep their medic(s) protected to keep reviving, and an even better squad will pick up the kits of dead medics to keep the reviving going)

I also found it just strange or odd that you can't spray a corpse with any effect at all. Just doesn't feel good.

So those are the 2 cons to the system. Here are the pros:

Getting killed doesn't mean you're taken out of the action. You can get revived if your squad is together. This reduces the time you have to wait, or time you have to spend travelling back into the fight.

It makes medics a more important role.


---


Now, what I'm saying is that the cons outweigh the pros. I think some simple modifications to the system would eliminate the cons and keep the pros fairly intact.

Being able to be instantly killed at a distance would be rare. I'd even be in favor of headshots not being one hit instant perma-deaths. Nobody likes to be killed instantly like that. But, what's the harm in being able to kill a body that has been downed? If my enemy took the time to walk up to my corpse, or spend the extra time and ammo to make sure I was dead, he damn well deserves the kill. And if I was smart, I was in a position that was behind cover, so that if I go down, my body is no longer visible to him to finish me off. Perfect, I can be revived because I was playing smart. My enemies can wipe me and my squad out if they put forth the necessary effort. Everyone's happy.

You look at me in the eyes and tell me that system would be worse than the current one.
Click to expand...
It does introduce changes to the metagame though. There's no real "downside" to choosing to finish off a downed enemy - a handful of shots and they're fully dead, so why wouldn't you spend that one second and 1% of your ammo to ensure he won't be revived? Now it's not important for Medics to camp defensively, because there are far fewer opportunities for people to be revived in the first place. So you get squads that are even more spread-out than they already are with full-squad forward spawning, which a) reduces the potential for teamwork overall (gain spotting, lose heal/revive/repair/supply/etc) and b) makes it even more vanishingly unlikely that a given squad will be wiped from the map - not to mention the fact that Medics are far more likely to shirk their healing and reviving in favour of gunning down enemies. So I don't know whether that would be a good change or a bad one. It would probably work better in conjunction with Squad Leader spawning.

Macro balance aside, I actually really do like the idea of it, and I'd like to see something similar in Hardcore mode. I just think it speaks more to our desire for more specific roleplay-ish realism in shooters than it does to our desire for fairness.
 
Ennui, are you defending it based on its... *gasp*.. realism?

:p
 
Ennui said:
Have you ever had a military issue tactical flashlight shined in your face from 15 feet away? This ain't your granddaddy's flashlight.
Click to expand...

A bunch of torches scuba divers use have similar strengths. They're fairly disorienting and blinding in the dark, though only a distraction/annoyance in a well-lit environment.
 
i used the flashlight for the first time last night... didn't like it. don't see the appeal in letting the opposition know where i am, precisely the reason i never use the laser sight nor have i played much (if any) recon.

rubbish bit of kit. still have yet to be trolled by it, when in doubt just spray towards the light. right now i'm having trouble with the UMP players and thats really about it.
 
I don't like BF3 at the moment because of the high bullet damage. Only thing that has prevented me from playing.

 
This is why splicing our soldiers with giraffe and shark DNA is only a good idea on paper.
 
Ennui said:
Have you ever had a military issue tactical flashlight shined in your face from 15 feet away? This ain't your granddaddy's flashlight.
Click to expand...

Did you know they used the same light for the sun and the flashlights?
 
Finally played Caspian. God, it is glorious. The game finally clicked with me when I was charging the Checkpoint cap, seeing tanker trucks blowing up in big balls of flames while jets were roaring overhead. That is Battlefield. This game isn't about picnics in the park.
 
I really want this game to succeed, I'm considering buying a new PC soon and that's with BF3 in mind (and for the moment also The Witcher 2 and ARMA2[soon 3?], but those are secondary)!

Shakermaker said:
Finally played Caspian. God, it is glorious. The game finally clicked with me when I was charging the Checkpoint cap, seeing tanker trucks blowing up in big balls of flames while jets were roaring overhead. That is Battlefield. This game isn't about picnics in the park.
Click to expand...

I suppose we're expecting similar things from BF3 (I guess because we played BF2 together for some time?) so that's good to hear. Hopefully most maps will be like that. And then there's going to be that Back to Karkand DLC (hopefully not splitting the community; yay disconnects, because you don't have the map), so they can't really screw up those maps, unless they do some serious changes to the layout.
 
Unfocused said:
I suppose we're expecting similar things from BF3 (I guess because we played BF2 together for some time?) so that's good to hear. Hopefully most maps will be like that. And then there's going to be that Back to Karkand DLC (hopefully not splitting the community; yay disconnects, because you don't have the map), so they can't really screw up those maps, unless they do some serious changes to the layout.
Click to expand...

Yeah we played together. :) This really is a new Battlefield game. It has scale, both in numbers of players and the size of the map. The added destructibility makes it even more awesome. I am quite sure you will like it.
 
Caspian is bringing my poor PC to its knees :(

I think my CPU is taking it the hardest, as audio is often delayed, cut off or repeated.

Also, providing cover-fire with the M249 is fantastic. I just hold down my mouse, spraying all 200 rounds down-range, cackling like a mad scientist.

EDIT: On another note, has anyone noticed that the M16's firemodes are semi-auto and full auto? What happened to burst? Battlelog states that the M16 has burst mode too. And the EXPLO spec doesn't provide you with extra hand grenades, is that something that's broken too?
 
I think originally the M16 was going to unrealistically combine the A1 and A3's fire modes (p. sure I didn't get those models right) and have single, burst, and full-auto, but they decided to just have both M16s instead, and then they moved burst to the M416 and threw out the other M16 variant.

In other news, if my video card would stop hard-locking again, I'd like that.
 
PvtRyan said:
Caspian is bringing my poor PC to its knees :(

I think my CPU is taking it the hardest, as audio is often delayed, cut off or repeated.

Also, providing cover-fire with the M249 is fantastic. I just hold down my mouse, spraying all 200 rounds down-range, cackling like a mad scientist.

EDIT: On another note, has anyone noticed that the M16's firemodes are semi-auto and full auto? What happened to burst? Battlelog states that the M16 has burst mode too. And the EXPLO spec doesn't provide you with extra hand grenades, is that something that's broken too?
Click to expand...
Nope, explosives (RPGs, Stingers, AT mines, C4) are a different "category" of weapons than grenades. Grenades (hand grenades, M320 ammo, etc) have their own specialization, I think it's called FRAG, which gives you 2x the amount of grenades. Same way it worked in BC2 :p

Shaker I'm glad you found what you're looking for. Caspian is totally different than Metro. I had the same "moment" you did, about 20 minutes into my first real intense game of Caspian (that wasn't just me and other BFO staff cackling with glee and flying jets around and exploring the map). I was helping take the Hilltop objective, which was heavily defended by enemy soldiers, with more spawning all the time since it was their last spawnpoint besides their deployment uncap. As we pushed up a path on the back, fighting desperately for every inch as grenades exploded around us, bullets ripped past all around and my squadmates were torn to shreds by the withering incoming fire in front of my eyes. We were basically pinned and would only last a few more seconds, although there were still the remnants of at least 3 or 4 squads near me. Then the tide shifted as two friendly tanks rolled up the hill on the road, flanking the guys who had us pinned and allowing us to continue pushing. The attack helicopter roared past over our heads and sent a barrage of rockets into the enemy position just feet ahead of us, and we mopped up the leftovers and took the point. Just epic.

Like I said, I haven't had that kind of "Battlefield" feeling in a long time, not since BF2 (as much as I love BC2, it just wasn't the same as a true BF game). I remember that same kind of moment when I realized how awesome BF2 was - it was during the demo, way back in the day. I was in a squad with Ritz/Burn, Mr Redundant, and some other old school HL2netters from that time period and we were moving out across the middle of Oman as a unit, headed to take one of the flags on the horizon. We came under fire from hidden enemies on a hill to our right just as a grenade went off in front of me, killing Ritz instantly (I still remember seeing her ragdoll crumple) and sending the rest of the squad diving to the ground and returning fire. Something clicked there. And it's still there in BF3.

This is why I've been telling you dudes to give it a chance, because Metro just doesn't really feel like a Battlefield game, it's just good hectic infantry combat.
 
i really am super stoked to be seeing so much good praise for caspian border because right now, although i can't play it, i'm having a ton of fun in operation metro so i'm only expecting things on the up and up from here.

also, holy ****ing shit at that video on the previous page :LOL: that glitch is seriously ****ing creepy, seeing folk crawling on their belly like that. bizarre.
 
Caspian is so much better than Metro. I wish they would tone down the overall desaturation because it still looks very washed out. I am really enjoying the open freedom of the game though. It would be nice to try and play as a squad with people I know, I usually just end up going solo and capping/holding points.

Does it do any good to shoot planes and helicopters with rifles?
 
Stigmata said:
In other news, if my video card would stop hard-locking again, I'd like that.
Click to expand...

The latest AMD catalyst(11.9) promised to fix crashes in BC2, but it also fixed my stutters and crashes in BF3.

Glad they put Caspian Border back in, it's amazing compared to Metro. Since I never played BF2 in the time it was cool I can't judge if it's "really battlefield" but I like the presence of 64-player and vehicles in a shooter.
 
Caspian seems like a huge step up from Metro, but my computer is struggling with it as well. Too bad I can't really afford to upgrade any time soon.
 
Ennui said:
Shaker I'm glad you found what you're looking for.
Click to expand...

Yeah, me too. Playing Metro really gave me the wrong impression. I was about to give up on the game, frustrated as I was with the lack of freedom and the funneled gameplay. I am really glad DICE decided open up Caspian. People should only decide about whether they like BF3 after playing that map.

Bad^Hat said:
Caspian seems like a huge step up from Metro, but my computer is struggling with it as well. Too bad I can't really afford to upgrade any time soon.
Click to expand...

I am surprised so many people's rigs are having problems with Caspian. It runs about the same as Metro for me. On the ground I get somewhere between 40 and 60 FPS, while in the air it goes up to 70 - 80 fps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Terminator
Long time...
Replies
16
Views
1K
Xtremecherry95YT
Xtremecherry95YT
Krynn72
You guys, what the **** is up.
Replies
11
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
HL2.NET HORROR SLAP
Replies
7
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
TechnoHippyChic
EA games returning to Steam
Replies
0
Views
1K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
Tollbooth Willie
To Those That Stand, Those That Fell
Replies
6
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
Back
Top