Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

BF 3

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
56,661
Spark Mandriller said:
What happened to putting cutscenes in games? At least you could skip those, these days you just get shit like that sniper hunt which doesn't actually have any gameplay, just stop/go/stop/go/stop/go/shoot a building, while a sniper who is coded not to hit you shoots at nothing. Are you going to be able to skip that? Of course not, that's apparently gameplay now. Gameplay with no actual play in it.

Not that the actual gunfight bits look any better.

I wonder how many modern companies actually played Half Life. In that game cinematics never actually interrupted gameplay, and in some cased actually enhanced it (like the faux-super smart AI of the Marines which, albeit scripted, was still awesome). Those were actually the best parts since much of the game revolved around not so entertaining jumping puzzles. Well, at least that was also gameplay. I wonder when this whole idea of substituting gameplay with passive cinematics actually started.
 

Destroid

Arcane
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
16,628
Location
Australia
Lyric Suite said:
Spark Mandriller said:
What happened to putting cutscenes in games? At least you could skip those, these days you just get shit like that sniper hunt which doesn't actually have any gameplay, just stop/go/stop/go/stop/go/shoot a building, while a sniper who is coded not to hit you shoots at nothing. Are you going to be able to skip that? Of course not, that's apparently gameplay now. Gameplay with no actual play in it.

Not that the actual gunfight bits look any better.

I wonder how many modern companies actually played Half Life. In that game cinematics never actually interrupted gameplay, and in some cased actually enhanced it (like the faux-super smart AI of the Marines which, albeit scripted, was still awesome). Those were actually the best parts since much of the game revolved around not so entertaining jumping puzzles. Well, at least that was also gameplay. I wonder when this whole idea of substituting gameplay with passive cinematics actually started.

I guess it's like the PC version of quick time events so we can blame... God of War? For making those popular?
 

Lyric Suite

Converting to Islam
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
56,661
Spark Mandriller said:
these days you just get shit like that sniper hunt which doesn't actually have any gameplay, just stop/go/stop/go/stop/go/shoot a building, while a sniper who is coded not to hit you shoots at nothing.

Shoots at nothing, but you still "feel" the effect. I had no idea that the mere proximity of bullets could cause your vision to blur and your body to jerk back as if you were actually impacted.
 

.Sigurd

Educated
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
758
Location
huahuahua
The SP surprisely remember Medal of Honor Allied Assault. You have the heavy scripted squad momments but you also have the "lone soldier in the frontlines" complete with ventilation ducts.
The guy is also playing with a mouse! Obviously :incline:
 

User was nabbed fit

Guest
Destroid said:
You hear that Skyway? Our resident specops guy likes BF more than ARMA. :smug:

Hey, I didn't say I liked it "more" than anything... but, yes, I do like BF games (the originals, and BFBC2, and, by the looks of things, this one too). ARMA is fun as well, but I don't always need the level of realism it offers. Sometimes I just need something more focused on streamlined gameplay.
 

Joghurt

Augur
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
980
Luzur said:
looks nice and all, but i wanted some other scenario then the usual Freedom bringing Americans in the Middle East.

why not something like a future muslim revolt in central Europe? or shit going down in Asia.

Well it's not gonna take place only in the Middle East. Here's a screenshot from New York and I hear some action is gonna take place in Paris



vquQD.jpg
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,872
Divinity: Original Sin
Joghurt said:
Well it's not gonna take place only in the Middle East. Here's a screenshot from New York
They had better not try the "Iran invades the US" card. I just played through Homefront* and I've had my dose of stupider-than-dirt "what if" scenarios.

* Incredibly shitty game btw. We're talking "Georgian Police is a masterpiece by comparison" shitty here.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
7,428
Location
Villainville
MCA
WOW! This is how Crysissy 2 should have been like!

Luzur said:
future muslim revolt in central Europe?

That would be swell. I'd buy it blind.

JarlFrank said:
With all these modern warfare games I wish good old WW2 would make a return.

MPs, heavy MGs and bolt-action rifles are more fun than all-round jack of all trades assault rifle.

Right? I was thinking about this a couple days ago. I wished for a game where aliens come invading during WW2 so the allied and the axis unite, if only to have a game campaign where you could play as a German soldier as the good guy for once.
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,872
Divinity: Original Sin
baronjohn said:
Yeah it's not plausible that Iran would invade the USA
Fixed to remove any ambiguity. And yeah I can totally see it being plausible. Iran, a completely isolated nation with about 5% of the US's military power and surrounded by US allies manages to cross half the world and invade the US, while NATO just watches.

I'd say Crysis 2's scenario is more plausible than this.
 

Secretninja

Cipher
Joined
May 30, 2009
Messages
3,797
Location
Orgrimmar
Sceptic said:
baronjohn said:
Yeah it's not plausible that Iran would invade the USA
Fixed to remove any ambiguity. And yeah I can totally see it being plausible. Iran, a completely isolated nation with about 5% of the US's military power and surrounded by US allies manages to cross half the world and invade the US, while NATO just watches.

I'd say Crysis 2's scenario is more plausible than this.

:lol:
 
Joined
Aug 5, 2009
Messages
3,749
Location
Moo?
Sceptic said:
baronjohn said:
Yeah it's not plausible that Iran would invade the USA
Fixed to remove any ambiguity. And yeah I can totally see it being plausible. Iran, a completely isolated nation with about 5% of the US's military power and surrounded by US allies manages to cross half the world and invade the US, while NATO just watches.

I'd say Crysis 2's scenario is more plausible than this.

Shit, did you read all those newspaper clippings in Homefront that lead up to the invasion? Bonehead after bonehead decision for years. Yeah, 'disturbingly plausible story' if all our leaders got lobotomies. Korea's more active, so obviously the Japanese (who hate the Koreans with a passion) are going to ask America to stop defending them and get TFO. America, who has a love for their sea toys surpassed by no one else...just up and drops all their aircraft carriers and scraps whole fleets in favor of a 'more flexible defense force'. Yeah, no. Not a chance. There's a newspaper clipping where someone straight out says that all Korean-made computer chips have a backdoor exploit that the Koreans themselves won't talk about.


This list goes on and on. I eventually started spending most of my time hunting more clippings



The fuck is this? How many things do you have to stack in a country's favor for them to be a threat before you realize it's probably time to start looking for a different antagonist?
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
Genma:TheDestroyer said:
Yeah, 'disturbingly plausible story' if all our leaders got lobotomies.

Welcome to the real world. The reasons that got Obama elected and saw McCain as his only opponent worth calling are chilling. If the wikileaks are true then I would successfully argue that most of your Presidents ARE lobotomized since and including JFK.

America in fact has the worst foreign and home policy for years now. Ok, they are not actually lobo'd but the fact is that they are a product of Cronyism and Nepotism. Its going to get much much worse before it gets better for the US. Enjoy your :decline:!

:D
 

Sceptic

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
10,872
Divinity: Original Sin
Genma:TheDestroyer said:
Shit, did you read all those newspaper clippings in Homefront that lead up to the invasion?
I tried. I honestly tried. I couldn't take it after maybe 5 or 6. I laughed throughout most of the intro video, but when I realized the game took the whole scenario so seriously I stopped laughing.

Yeah, 'disturbingly plausible story' if all our leaders got lobotomies.
It's not so much the decisions as the completely nonsensical events that they lead to. North Korea invades South Korea in 2012... wait, isn't that NEXT YEAR? and they did this while the US troops stationed in SK just watched? (they do this before the US "doesn't abandon their Asian allies") There's the Japan thing you mentioned, there's this wonderful EMP technology (fired from a satellite, no less) that can knock out the entire power grid of the USA... without affecting Canada's of course. That's one hell of a satellite.

And I can totally see the US army just sitting by while NK invades Hawai and sends paratroopers over the midwest. Serisouly, WTF?

Oh and if there's an oil crisis worldwide... where did Korea get their oil again?

That backdoor exploit thing is hilarious too. Someone obviously got their North and South mixed up.

The fuck is this? How many things do you have to stack in a country's favor for them to be a threat before you realize it's probably time to start looking for a different antagonist?
Welcome to what passes for "speculative" fiction nowadays. It's why I hate the term. There is nothing speculative about this kind of scenario; I really mean it when I say it's about as plausible as aliens from outer space invading. In Homefront's case specifically, I read that they initally wanted the Chinese as the villains, but realized that wasn't very plausible due to US-Chinese economic interdependency. Of course this somehow makes them think it plausible that the entire world just watched while all this happened. Hilariously, you get some bit about the EU thinking about helping... three years later. Da fuck?

So, erm, yeah, I hope BF3 doesn't go down that "speculative fiction" route. You want some baddies in Paris and NY, that's fine; in that case please keep them as generic as possible and do NOT try to identify them with a real world group if you don't want us to point at your game and laugh.
 

Destroid

Arcane
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
16,628
Location
Australia
The enemy faction appears to be a generic middle east army, like the MEC (middle east coalition) from BF2 or like the GLA from CnC Generals.
 

kris

Arcane
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
8,844
Location
Lulea, Sweden
Sceptic said:
And I can totally see the US army just sitting by while NK invades Hawai and sends paratroopers over the midwest. Serisouly, WTF?

They should probably just skip the story. I played a little bit of modern warefare2 in the weekend and there it is the same stuff. I can stand it, barely.

There Russia paradrops the entire american east coast.

1. They do it in revenge for a massacre... Wait, people would actually believe that the US sanctioned a random massacre at an airport for no reason? Just because one corpse left was of a american that didn't actually shot much? None of the people doing the massacre had masks and an airport is full of cameras, would be easy to identify the people.

2. Their response is an massive invasion, which is less plausible than that alien invasion. Have they seen a map, the distance from Russia to the American east coast?

3.
- Their planes would not be able to make it back. 100% loss.
- Their paratroopers would be on a suicide mission.
- They employed 100s/1000s+ of helicopters who must have teleported to America. I don't know how they would have got there otherwise.
- Apparently they paradropped immense amounts of equipment, including big vehicles.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
7,428
Location
Villainville
MCA
kris said:
Just because one corpse left was of a american that didn't actually shot much?

Speak for yourself :smug:

The tragic thing about COD series is that the WW2 entries of the series were just fine. They worked beautifully, without diluting the experience with shitty pretenses of a story. Even Black Ops had a few very good, enjoyable levels.

But I've got to give it to all the people who worked on either entry in the series (with the exception of MW campaign): details -not overall design- in levels of COD games and general effects (debris, explosions, smoke etc.) have always been among the best of their times. They are lagging behind in raw tech, but make up for it with excellent art direction and attention to details.
 

User was nabbed fit

Guest
kris said:
- Their planes would not be able to make it back. 100% loss.
- Their paratroopers would be on a suicide mission.

Not an issue for the Soviet army. :smug:
 

poocolator

Erudite
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
7,948
Location
The Order of Discalced Codexian Convulsionists
ortucis said:
Luzur said:
looks nice and all, but i wanted some other scenario then the usual Freedom bringing Americans in the Middle East.

why not something like a future muslim revolt in central Europe? or shit going down in Asia.


How exactly do you think they will sell such a game to Americans? US and surrounding areas are the major gaming market for such games. Creating a game where you play as Indian or Russian forces fighting against Chinese and Pakistani forces isn't really going to be appealing.

So Americans saving the world from Chinese. Islamic or Alien invasion is the best bet for most sales. Especially for a military shooter.

EDIT: On the side note, BF3 looks awesome and is PC friendly. I enjoyed Bad Company 2 SP a lot so looking forward to BF3 SP as well.
It's interesting that in all my time playing BF2, I only managed to clock at most 5 hours of playing as the US. Compare that with the 100 hours as MEC, 50 hours as Chinese, etc.

But this was years ago. Ah, memories.
 
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
588
That might just mean you like having better guns. Most of the USMC ones weren't really as good as the MEC/PLA options.
 

Destroid

Arcane
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
16,628
Location
Australia
That's pretty surprising, considering US was on more maps than the other factions from my recollection.
 

Destroid

Arcane
Joined
May 9, 2007
Messages
16,628
Location
Australia
So I was looking on wikipedia to see if there was a release date listed and it said 'Fall 2011'. Fuck you wikipedia and fuck the dumbass that wrote that.

Also discovered this little morsel:

"This November, we're launching Battlefield 3. It's going up against the next Call of Duty, which is presently the #1 game in the game industry," he said. "A game that last year did $400 million dollars in revenue on day one. Battlefield 3 is designed to take that game down." EA is planning on spending over $100 million dollars on a marketing campaign for Battlefield 3.

Pretty fucking ridiculous I wonder how much they spend on the actual game. Apparently it will be release around Nov2, approximately a week before the next CoD game.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom