Poll

battlefield 4

wowsers in my trousers
55 (37.9%)
bangarangzanga
17 (11.7%)
.
44 (30.3%)
awful
10 (6.9%)
wish it didnt exist
19 (13.1%)

Total Members Voted: 145

Author Topic: Battlefield Megathread  (Read 611412 times)

There has been some disappointment from console gamers over the fact that the console version of Battlefield 3 support 40 less players than the PC version: 24 vs. 64. DICE’s Patrick Bach, speaking to GameZone.de, said that they’d love to add 64 players to consoles, but that the hardware simply wouldn’t handle it, and that corners would have to be cut in order to support that many players. Bach said,



“Everything is a compromise. It’s not that we’re evil or stupid. We didn’t choose not to have more players – we would love to do 64 players on console but then we would have to cut away so much; people would get very upset that it looked worse, played worse and wasn’t as fun as the PC version. We would never do that because the fun is always more important.”



Bach also confirmed that jets would be available in conquest multiplayer maps on consoles, adding that if they upped the player limit, they’d have to remove vehicles because they demand a lot more CPU and network data. Bach assured that while console maps would be smaller, they wouldn’t be “cut in half”, but instead would be “compacted slightly” to increase the action.
Bad Company 2 supported only 24 players as well, but still featured fairly large maps and some intense action. We’re sure Battlefield 3 will match that, if not surpass it by a huge margin.

Mag has up to 256 people though.
So could it really be that bad to have up to 64 people?

Mag has up to 256 people though.
So could it really be that bad to have up to 64 people?
Mag probably has less features and won't look as good as BF3 on the consoles.

I want Battlefield 3 online to feel more like the first BC, the maps were relatively good for the 24 player limit. Not so big in which it's hard to find other people, but not so small everyone is in one spot.

Mag probably has less features and won't look as good as BF3 on the consoles.
I also forgot that BF3 has vehicles while Mag does not so ignore that post lol.
 :cookieMonster:

I also forgot that BF3 has vehicles while Mag does not so ignore that post lol.
 :cookieMonster:
Yep. In the post it also says vehicles use a lot more CPU and network data.

I also forgot that BF3 has vehicles while Mag does not so ignore that post lol.
 :cookieMonster:
MAG has vehicles, dozens of them on each map. :P

MAG has vehicles, dozens of them on each map. :P
Then I have no idea how it can run 256 players with dozens of vehicles and decent graphics on a console.

They're making a throwback map pack from the old games right?
Better have Verdun.

They're making a throwback map pack from the old games right?
Better have Verdun.
I think it will have Karkand, Oman, Wake Island, and Sharqi. There's probably more that I don't know about

Are they still doing the alpha ;-;

Tell me hoa.

Are they still doing the alpha ;-;

Tell me hoa.
Pretty sure they are read OP to see how to get in

MAG has vehicles, dozens of them on each map. :P
Agh lol I completely forgot, they're so hard to get into though.
Especially on that one mode which name eludes me.

There are no custom classes? forget this stuff.

There are no custom classes? forget this stuff.
Custom being SUPAR TACTIC00L MW2 style?