Battlefield 3 out Fall 2011

[C47]

At least it's not like Halo where they force everyone to get the map packs after a certain point otherwise you can't even play 90% of the game modes.

Did they seriously do this??? I haven't touched Halo since Halo 3....

[Mattiekrome]

Because every other game company doesn't charge for extra content right :rolleyes:....it's not just an EA thing it's a game thing....

Not a jab at EA/DICE, althought it probably did sound that way. Just frustrating that with the release so far away, they could easily incorporate the additional maps into the actual release instead of waiting for a month after release then charging extra for it. Just proof that game developers are no longer happy with charging $50-$60 for a game, now they want extra money above and beyond for additional content. Just sad to see the "new way" that devs think.

[Zaximus]

Not a jab at EA/DICE, althought it probably did sound that way. Just frustrating that with the release so far away, they could easily incorporate the additional maps into the actual release instead of waiting for a month after release then charging extra for it. Just proof that game developers are no longer happy with charging $50-$60 for a game, now they want extra money above and beyond for additional content. Just sad to see the "new way" that devs think.

Most games like CoD etc, have the maps for both map packs already complete mostly, before the game even ships. That's just how it works now, since DLC is in the financial model. Blame the consumers for being OK paying $15 for 4 maps twice after already paying $60. You can't fault the game companies, I'd do it too.

If they start charging "per month" I wonder if map packs are going to become free (since you pay monthly). They should be. I don't think people would mind paying $5 bucks a month if it mean a couple extra maps each month, maybe some new guns, and things like that. Improved patch process and anti-cheater/glitchers would have to be in that too.

[Montsta]

Actually in BFBC2 I've seen guys at Arika Harbor or whatever that map is called snipe and lead the boards because they're sittin on that one mountain during a rush game and racking up HUGE points for super long distance headshots. That's about the only time though.

[SorthNarolina]

Most games like CoD etc, have the maps for both map packs already complete mostly, before the game even ships. That's just how it works now, since DLC is in the financial model. Blame the consumers for being OK paying $15 for 4 maps twice after already paying $60. You can't fault the game companies, I'd do it too.

If they start charging "per month" I wonder if map packs are going to become free (since you pay monthly). They should be. I don't think people would mind paying $5 bucks a month if it mean a couple extra maps each month, maybe some new guns, and things like that. Improved patch process and anti-cheater/glitchers would have to be in that too.

i don't like that corporate model though. The games are being rushed to production and it really makes you wish they had more time to sort things out just right. I don't play a lot of video games, but I'd much rather play a really good game like half life 2, halo, or something of that sort than a decent call of duty every year. It just kind of sucks, i seriously would not want my hypothetical children playing CoD just because it sucks and it's not well made in a way that would make them think.

[YoungPanthers89]

[YoungPanthers89]

[YoungPanthers89]

[YoungPanthers89]

[Zaximus]

The game looks so much better than CoD, visually.

[YoungPanthers89]

[tarheelblue89]

Why does it seem like this game is just Homefront with better graphics.

I've never played a Battlefield game, but I hated Homefront and BF3 just gives that same feel.

Just tell me I'm wrong.

[Seamonk]

Why does it seem like this game is just Homefront with better graphics.

I've never played a Battlefield game, but I hated Homefront and BF3 just gives that same feel.

Just tell me I'm wrong.

Hm. I've never played Homefront, but to generally put it, Battlefield games are more about team victories than 1 guy running around killing people. They are structured so that if you're a team player, you are rewarded more via points and usually set yourself up to get kills in the process. There is also no such thing as camping, the maps are too large for camping to be problematic since it's just not worth sitting in a corner with a shotty for 30 minutes hoping someone walks by.. ESPECIALLY since that corner can be blown up.

Simply put, a CoD fanboy can never play this game because it would require more patience and using your teammates to their advantage (since there are roles), and because it actually takes effort to kill someone.(I'm talking about you FAMAS and Cod4 M16). From playing both for extended periods of time, I've personally found it easier to transition from playing BF to COD and being successful, than from COD to BF.

[YoungPanthers89]

http://electromodo.blogspot.com/2011/07/battlefield-3-3-more-leaked-videos.html

8 "leaked" vids