Battlefield 3 announced
- Thread starter Dresden
- Start date
I wish I didn't suck quite so much at these twitch games. Actually I'll rephrase that, I don't really get on with infantry-based games in tunnels, I much prefer tank-oriented games.
Anyway I had a bit of a wander around the Metro map, it's alright but reinforces my dislike of infantry-in-a-bottle style maps. As a total n00b it's a bit of a *tch* died again ah well experience. Got sworn at in Russian for wandering around admiring the sights, you'd think my team-mates would be more understanding.
A GTX570 seems to struggle a little bit with a 2560x1600 monitor.
Anyway I had a bit of a wander around the Metro map, it's alright but reinforces my dislike of infantry-in-a-bottle style maps. As a total n00b it's a bit of a *tch* died again ah well experience. Got sworn at in Russian for wandering around admiring the sights, you'd think my team-mates would be more understanding.
A GTX570 seems to struggle a little bit with a 2560x1600 monitor.
90% of games are fine, but all it takes is a decent sniper to lock down an entire avenue of attack (and N to lock down the rest). It's really only a problem at higher levels of play, not with random disorganized defenders. It's just really, *really* easy to prevent any number of people from making forward progress on this map once you hit the metro area. It's not very hard to just keep clicking when you see movement with your scope lined up down a hallway 
It only takes 1-2 shots to kill someone with an SVD/MK11 and half-decent aim.
Smoke grenades really are the proper solution (and would look great with flashlights!) but apparently there were "technical issues" that prevented them being in multiplayer.
Anyways I'm not too concerned because it really is this map design that makes it a problem. I doubt it'll be much of an issue on more open maps and with vehicles, as long as snipers don't really have an effective anti-vehicle mechanism (which I don't think they do).
The metro map just isn't the best design for Battlefield IMHO, but I've never really liked rush (and the way that tickets reset). Still, the fact that the difficulty curve is (from hardest to easiest for attackers) area 3, 2, 1, 4 makes it a bit weird to play. I don't think I have ever seen the attackers lose in area 4, but I'd be interested to see the stats that I presume DICE is gathering. Fundamentally though, the huge, glaring issue with Rush is that the relative balance of attack/defense changes based on how many people are in the game. Fewer favors attackers and more favors defenders. That's why IMHO it's never going to be a particularly serious mode.
It only takes 1-2 shots to kill someone with an SVD/MK11 and half-decent aim.Smoke grenades really are the proper solution (and would look great with flashlights!) but apparently there were "technical issues" that prevented them being in multiplayer.
Anyways I'm not too concerned because it really is this map design that makes it a problem. I doubt it'll be much of an issue on more open maps and with vehicles, as long as snipers don't really have an effective anti-vehicle mechanism (which I don't think they do).
Agreed, but it's very easy for a single player to hold off 3-5 enemies indefinitely in various areas. Defense is just a bit more stacked than I think it needs to be considering they already have equal footing in terms of players and firepower.
The metro map just isn't the best design for Battlefield IMHO, but I've never really liked rush (and the way that tickets reset). Still, the fact that the difficulty curve is (from hardest to easiest for attackers) area 3, 2, 1, 4 makes it a bit weird to play. I don't think I have ever seen the attackers lose in area 4, but I'd be interested to see the stats that I presume DICE is gathering. Fundamentally though, the huge, glaring issue with Rush is that the relative balance of attack/defense changes based on how many people are in the game. Fewer favors attackers and more favors defenders. That's why IMHO it's never going to be a particularly serious mode.
Last edited by a moderator:
RenegadeRocks
Legend
True, i am just trying to point out that this particular place on map is totally unbalanced. there should not be places on map that are godly for camping yet cannot be flanked. I tried lobbing nades thru the vents for a while with support but with no luck. This camper was just well positioned (holes in that vent are few meters apart from each other so there is plenty of space to hide from nades).
That single player was not able to turn the tides of that match, he was merely annoying. But i also think that well organized squad can gain unfair advantage over their opponents.
In my opinion when team moves to the second area and enters the metro tunnels there should not be a way for the opposite team to stay behind them and spawn reinforcements.
aaronspink
Veteran
Does this strike anyone else as incredibly stupid and just plain dumb? Why put out a 2 month old build with tons of broken stuff when you have a much newer build that actually works?
Yeah. How long does certification take for release on Xbox and PS3?
My friend has a Core 2 Duo (not overclocked) with a 6950. He plays at a lower resolution (1680?) but reports the game plays at a similar level to BC2 on his system - he's satisfied with it and won't be upgrading his CPU.
I was on a Quad 9550 overclocked to 3.7ghz with a 4870x2 @ 1920x1080. Game was struggling on High and even on Medium got quite choppy. CPU usually sitting at 100%.
After looking at a few reports I saw people playing the game with similar CPUs but more modern graphics cards with no problem, so I replaced my 4870x2 with a GTX 570. It's now butter smooth on High.
I haven't checked to confirm, but my suspicion is that the 4k series drivers have some problem with BF3 that causes CPU usage to spike. It's noteworthy that the Catalyst BF3 drivers only mention support for 5k and 6k series.
Damn, You have already changed Your gpu's. I would love to have test on this q9550 with one 4870 on low ;p
Thanks for reply regardless.
I'll try to dig out some q6600/q9550 + 5770 tests.
Yep, something is broken with 4xxx series
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=31500105&postcount=887
Thanks for reply regardless.
I'll try to dig out some q6600/q9550 + 5770 tests.
Yep, something is broken with 4xxx series
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=31500105&postcount=887
Last edited by a moderator:
Hehehe yep three years with my 4870x2 and it never missed a beat until now. I was going to hold out for a high end GCN but it was not to be.
Ah good to know we're not the only ones! Shame that AMD have dropped support the 4k series. Perhaps the next driver alongside the release of BF3 will have support?
Oh no I mean around 30fps. Not ideal but playable.
I tested it a few days ago on a wolfdale with 2mb l2, it's not to bad, I even tested at 2.7GHz, although I didn't run fraps or anything like that all I can say is that it was playable,
at 3.7GHz I played for a few minutes and the lowest I saw was 33, almost all the time over 40fps going as high as 50-60 in some parts, that was with a HD5750 on 1280x1024 full screen and medium,
but the problem is, the game crashes (game freezes, but the OS still works well, the game process keep working at 90%+ CPU usage and all...), and have some visual artifacts here and there (I made sure to test the system stability, running at 2.7GHz was one of tests as I tested different ram, 3 or 4 drivers, underclocked the VGA, tested it on burntest and other games and it's working stable), which are worse with the BF3 optimized drivers, with the 11.9 it reduces this problem considerably I think, although performance is slightly worse
CPU usage is always around 100%, system memory usage was around 2.4GB, GPU usage is also very high,
I will try to test on low details and 1024x768 later to reduce the GPU impact and see what happens,
edit: just did some quick testing, using catalyst 10.9 now and fraps,
640x480 low was mostly around 40-50fps, lowest I saw was into the 30s just for a very brief moment, I tested it in the first part of the map and then the first part of the subway (I'm not considering the first few seconds of gameplay when it was still being loaded from the hard drive an such),
just slightly better than on 1280x1024 medium,
so it's quite playable on a e5400 at 3.7GHz ("Core 2 duo" with 2mb l2) and DDR2 800 cas 6, but a quad core could easily improve this (Phenom II X4 at 3ghz should be more than enough for a very high quality gameplay), on the other hand the game is much more GPU intensive, but the HD5750 is enough for playing in medium settings in lower resolutions (I think 1600x900 should still be OK),
Last edited by a moderator:
Svensk Viking
Regular
They'd rather see us getting new video cards instead I assume
I have never had much belief in AMD/Nvidia's support for older GPUs, that's why I as often as I can try the new stuff on my bro's HD5770 instead
