Discussion Forums > Gaming
Battlefield 3
AceHigh:
Obviously console versions have in game options and server lists. I bet if the legitimate customers bug developers long enough, they may port that part of the game from the consoles. Should not be so expensive since the system exists, besides having both the in game menu and browser based "jump quickly into a game" will make everyone happy and DICE can afford making everyone happy for their high reputation.
What is sad is that 2 of my friends cancelled pre-orders already, so I am worried that I will run out of people that I can visit and watch how the full version turns out.
TMRNetShark:
--- Quote from: AceHigh on September 30, 2011, 06:33:43 PM ---Obviously console versions have in game options and server lists. I bet if the legitimate customers bug developers long enough, they may port that part of the game from the consoles. Should not be so expensive since the system exists, besides having both the in game menu and browser based "jump quickly into a game" will make everyone happy and DICE can afford making everyone happy for their high reputation.
What is sad is that 2 of my friends cancelled pre-orders already, so I am worried that I will run out of people that I can visit and watch how the full version turns out.
--- End quote ---
Are PC players that stubborn to not use a browser to play the game online? If DICE decides to keep it the way it is and no one buys the game whatsoever and it fails... it'll be a bitter sweet victory for the PC crowd because then another big FPS will just concentrate on consoles.... (CoD being the other big one)
It's DICE/EA's fault for doing this and having a browser based game setup... and it's making PC players just so mad. Both sides seem dug in... but EA knows/thinks the game will sell well regardless of what the hardcore thinks/wants. Am I still buying the game? Yes... I can deal without a in game menu and to be honest... I really don't mind battlelog. It's not as bad as what people are making it out to be... but what do you expect with something new?
I mean, I remember a lot of people butthurt about when Steam was required to play Half Life 2... now it's not even mentioned when a game requires you to make a Steam account. Change is good, if your PC can't handle the extra resources of origins plus battlelog plus the game itself... well... get a new PC.
Supai:
--- Quote from: TMRNetShark on September 30, 2011, 08:10:58 PM ---Are PC players that stubborn to not use a browser to play the game online?
--- End quote ---
Yes.
--- Quote from: TMRNetShark on September 30, 2011, 08:10:58 PM ---I mean, I remember a lot of people butthurt about when Steam was required to play Half Life 2... now it's not even mentioned when a game requires you to make a Steam account.
--- End quote ---
And that pisses me the fuck off. I hate it when I buy a retail box and I still have to install fucking Steam.
Yeah, decided not to pre-order, this thing is giving more headache than enjoyment.
AceHigh:
Tell me, what is new and good about battlelog? What awesome features does it have that couldn't be in-game? You have been defending it a lot without giving it a single merit.
TMRNetShark:
--- Quote from: AceHigh on September 30, 2011, 09:39:30 PM ---Tell me, what is new and good about battlelog? What awesome features does it have that couldn't be in-game? You have been defending it a lot without giving it a single merit.
--- End quote ---
What it does right:
It connects stats, forums, and a social network aspect. Battlefield is about multiplayer and the interaction with other people in an online world. So what happens? You have a game that you play in the regular Frostbite engine BUT adds the same element that we have here at BakaBT. I know that you yourself enjoy social networking (kick and moan about it, but because you post here.. you are part of that social networking). So lets say you want to organize an event where it's all Snipers only/Knife only... would you rather boot up a game, log in, then try to willfully use an ingame browser? No, you'd rather use a web browser that was built to do that sort of thing.
Then, lets say you played a really good game and your teammates were all fantastic. You want to play with them again, right? Except, you have to run to do something else (cause real life matters). Easy. Later on, you can just log on to Battlelog and send all those people in that match (supposing it was your last match) a friend request. Better yet, a lot of us have smart phones... just send it through your smart phone.
Let's say your at school or at work and you want to brag to your friends/co-workers of your scores. EASY. Just bring up Battlelog and you have every single stat that you would want to brag to your friends about. "Yeah, my KDR is killer!" or "My accuracy is shitty... but I just like shooting a lot of bullets!" It's all right there in the browser. Lets say you want to set up a game with all your friends tonight but can't get to your Battlefield 3 installed computer until later one... just log on, type up a fast message to all your friends and PRESTO! Done.
The arguments against Battlelog: server switching is a pain and what happens when Battlelog is down?
(The argument of key bindings and graphical settings are a one time thing and you don't have to do them every game)
So by adding an in-game menu would do a couple of things. Server switching will still log you out of your current game, dumb the map from memory, pick your next game, and then load up the map of that server. Except now people will be under the impression that they still are "within the game engine".... no... you are in the game menu. I don't think Frostbite 2 engine has a "menu" option... so "browser" menu is essentially the same as "in-game" menu. Either way, you are still going to have to load the maps whenever your switch a server... don't believe me? You don't have to, it's just people butt hurting because something is different even though it WORKS.
The second problem has a little more validity. What happens when Battlelog is down? No one will be able to sign into the website and play single player during the downtime without an in-game menu, right? If there was an option to launch the game's singleplayer from the desktop without needing to go through Battlelog would be great. If I HAVE to log into Battlelog to play singleplayer AND it's down... I'm gonna have a problem.
So yes, for the most part, Battlelog is a nice addition. If everyone wants to go back to 2001 games... well... go install games from 2001 and have fun. I'll go ahead and play the new games with new features and new ways to connect with other people in my favorite multiplayer games.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version