Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Battlefield 3 Beta


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
34 replies to this topic

#1 ChurchSkiz   Members   -  Reputation: 435

Posted 03 October 2011 - 05:58 PM

Official BF3 thread?

I don't like how you have to run the game from a browser and can't change settings unless you're actually in the game. Also, having to install Origin, plus a browser plug-in, even if you buy the retail copy bugs me.

What I don't understand is why they are beta'ing an infantry only map? It makes it seem more like a MW knockoff than a sequel to BF2.

That being said, my thoughts on the game itself are generally positive. I like how the buildings blow up. I like the unlock system. The gameplay itself is top notch.

My Origin ID is ChurchSkiz if anyone wants to friend me, post your ID if you're playing the beta.

Sponsor:

#2 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 03 October 2011 - 06:55 PM

What I don't understand is why they are beta'ing an infantry only map? It makes it seem more like a MW knockoff than a sequel to BF2.


Probably because they're more worried about netcode than gameplay for the initial beta.

Still waiting for all my computer parts to come, so I have no opinion on the game right now other than I wish I could play it :(

#3 ChurchSkiz   Members   -  Reputation: 435

Posted 03 October 2011 - 08:01 PM

Still waiting for all my computer parts to come, so I have no opinion on the game right now other than I wish I could play it :(


Doesn't take much. I have a 6950 and have all settings on Ultra at 1900x1200 and haven't had a jitter yet.

#4 Sirisian   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1641

Posted 03 October 2011 - 09:11 PM

Played it a bit. Runs on ultra on my laptop (1920x1080). Not really my kind of game. Bit too fast paced with very little teamwork. Any server with even a little bit of latency problems is worthless and unplayable. Just results in "wtf moments" since you fall down dead instead of getting hit then getting a few ms to respond.

In that respect I was hoping to play on the Caspian map since it's more like BF2 people said.

#5 boolean   Members   -  Reputation: 1702

Posted 03 October 2011 - 09:12 PM

Doesn't take much. I have a 6950 and have all settings on Ultra at 1900x1200 and haven't had a jitter yet.


Just picked up a GTX 570 myself :D *video card high five*

I can't bring myself to install Origin. I just know if I do, in a few months when 4chan gets hold of the auto-patching server and loads it with malware I'll be cursing EA.

Am I being irrational by having an irrational fear/hatred of Origin? I really want to play BF3.

[Android] Stupid Human Castles - If Tetris had monsters with powers and were attacking human castles. "4/5 - frandroid.com"

Full version and Demo Version available on the Android app store.


#6 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 03 October 2011 - 09:13 PM

Doesn't take much. I have a 6950 and have all settings on Ultra at 1900x1200 and haven't had a jitter yet.


I will clarify and say that my "computer" does not have any parts that make it functional yet ;)

I am building a new desktop and haven't gotten any of the important pieces yet. So far I have a case, and a mistakenly bought cheap network card which will be sent back soon.

edit: by "gotten" I mean physically received. They are already purchased and in transport.

#7 frob   Moderators   -  Reputation: 19001

Posted 03 October 2011 - 11:54 PM

I can't bring myself to install Origin. I just know if I do, in a few months when 4chan gets hold of the auto-patching server and loads it with malware I'll be cursing EA.

Am I being irrational by having an irrational fear/hatred of Origin? I really want to play BF3.


Suspect all software. Many people love and trust Steam, yet look at the frequent patches they release, many to patch exploits like you mentioned.

I think it is irrational. You trust all the other crap on your machine; this one is backed by a fortune 500 company. If they screw up badly there will be some pretty big reprecussions. They have QA groups larger than many entire studios. Sure you are at risk for skript kiddiez, but that is always true of all software.

If you don't trust it, or trust it less than all the other crap already on your machine, then try it in VMWare. Worst that happens is you end up deleting a virtual machine.
Check out my personal indie blog at bryanwagstaff.com.

#8 Molle85   Members   -  Reputation: 172

Posted 04 October 2011 - 01:10 AM

Official BF3 thread?

I don't like how you have to run the game from a browser and can't change settings unless you're actually in the game. Also, having to install Origin, plus a browser plug-in, even if you buy the retail copy bugs me.


They've done the similar things with games on Steam, so why would this be any different?
Personally I like the browser stuff, It's very smooth and you can look at stats and shit while waiting for the game to load.

What I don't understand is why they are beta'ing an infantry only map? It makes it seem more like a MW knockoff than a sequel to BF2.


This is a beta, it's not the final product, it's not for you to "play" the game,
Mostly Open Betas are used for stress testing the servers.
They don't give you the game for free with this, they merely want people to help them make it better before launch which is coming up very close.

#9 James Leighe   Members   -  Reputation: 222

Posted 04 October 2011 - 01:50 AM

Just to be sure the whole browser game lobby thing is just to get you to install spyware on your browser.

Its a horrible system, and think about it, what good does it actually seem to do vs in-game lobby?
Still preordered... But will be using origin under protest.

People can say steam is as bad, but steam is an order of magnitude less bad than origin.
If you don't believe me wait till the stories start cropping up.

#10 Hodgman   Moderators   -  Reputation: 27857

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:03 AM

Can someone explain the browser plugin to me? Is it the server browser -- so to change servers, you've got to quit the game and go back to your browser, then launch the game again?
With this browser plugin, can I choose which browser it is installed into? I really don't want to clog up my everyday browser with stupid useless plugins, so I'd prefer to use IE or some crap instead if I can. Wait, seeing as Origin has a browser embedded in it, why doesn't it launch from Origin?

#11 James Leighe   Members   -  Reputation: 222

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:17 AM

Can someone explain the browser plugin to me? Is it the server browser -- so to change servers, you've got to quit the game and go back to your browser, then launch the game again?
With this browser plugin, can I choose which browser it is installed into? I really don't want to clog up my everyday browser with stupid useless plugins, so I'd prefer to use IE or some crap instead if I can. Wait, seeing as Origin has a browser embedded in it, why doesn't it launch from Origin?


You have to exit or minimize the game and go back to your browser to change servers.
It has to be installed on your default browser. So, you COULD make IE your default and always launch your browser of choice from the start menu.
The reason they are not using the embedded browser is because they want to collect your browsing habits.

I just tried running origin in a sandbox, giving it full access to everything it could possibly need to run, and guess what?
It exits instantly.
Guess it has a check to make sure it has access to your whole hdd before it will even run!

There is some app out there that can tell you everything a running exe accesses, if someone could link me I would be very grateful.
I'm honestly just curious if I can fight the man a little on this one just for fun. It's a matter of principal, I don't really care if they can see my porn :P

EDIT:
NM Found it, Process Monitor:
http://technet.micro...ernals/bb896645

Also: http://www.ps3hax.ne...7691#post257691
How to lock origin into a sandbox.

Still don't help the browser plugins tho.

#12 James Leighe   Members   -  Reputation: 222

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:22 AM

Hey hodgman add me on origin once you get it so we can be best buddies!

user:GoldDustGasoline

#13 ChurchSkiz   Members   -  Reputation: 435

Posted 04 October 2011 - 07:34 AM

Am I being irrational by having an irrational fear/hatred of Origin? I really want to play BF3.


No. About the only thing that would get me to install Origin was waiting 4 years for BF3. I wrestled but my apathy won out.

As an FYI, I denied the plugin to Firefox, it wouldn't let me launch the game. Went into IE and installed the plugin, game worked fine. Went back to FireFox, and could launch the server browser from FF. So it looks like the plugin installs to the machine and not to a specific browser (meaning once you install on a throw-away browser it's tracking every browser you use). Though with FF you can disable the plug-in manually.

This is a beta, it's not the final product, it's not for you to "play" the game,
Mostly Open Betas are used for stress testing the servers.
They don't give you the game for free with this, they merely want people to help them make it better before launch which is coming up very close.


I get that it's a beta, but they have to expect that many people are going to use the beta as a deciding factor to preorder or get the game. From that respect, they need to be concious of what people's first impressions are. You can stress test on any map, so why not pick one with vehicles? Also, wouldn't you want to iron out the wrinkles in your vehicle system since that's such a huge part of the game?

#14 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 04 October 2011 - 07:54 AM

You have to exit or minimize the game and go back to your browser to change servers.
It has to be installed on your default browser. So, you COULD make IE your default and always launch your browser of choice from the start menu.
The reason they are not using the embedded browser is because they want to collect your browsing habits.


You only enter the back end of the game when you are playing matches. The browser plugin replaces the entire UI/Main menu of the game. If you've played league of legends it's a similar concept to their launcher. Technically it is two apps (one launcher and one game), but they integrate together.

Why do you think that is the reason they are doing it this way James? There are a myriad of benefits that have nothing to do with data mining that come from launching the game from the browser. It's actually a fairly interesting concept. Think of how rapidly they can push updates to their UI without users having to overcrowd update servers. Hosting it on a website also reduces redundancy that you see in other games (see bungie.net or steam). You just need to develop 1 website and your users get access to their social network, game stats, game announcements, etc from pretty much any platform.

#15 Luckless   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1679

Posted 04 October 2011 - 11:43 AM


You have to exit or minimize the game and go back to your browser to change servers.
It has to be installed on your default browser. So, you COULD make IE your default and always launch your browser of choice from the start menu.
The reason they are not using the embedded browser is because they want to collect your browsing habits.


You only enter the back end of the game when you are playing matches. The browser plugin replaces the entire UI/Main menu of the game. If you've played league of legends it's a similar concept to their launcher. Technically it is two apps (one launcher and one game), but they integrate together.

Why do you think that is the reason they are doing it this way James? There are a myriad of benefits that have nothing to do with data mining that come from launching the game from the browser. It's actually a fairly interesting concept. Think of how rapidly they can push updates to their UI without users having to overcrowd update servers. Hosting it on a website also reduces redundancy that you see in other games (see bungie.net or steam). You just need to develop 1 website and your users get access to their social network, game stats, game announcements, etc from pretty much any platform.


And all of those benefits and more can be had with an in game browser. Want to be able to modify the menu by driving it off an HTML based system? Use an in game browser, that can be stripped down and offer you complete control over rendering methods. Plus you don't have to worry about hundreds of variable factors where everyone has a different web browser with different plug ins, etc.

Not to mention that the first three servers I tried joining became full by the time I tried joining.


Honestly, I can't think of a single good, and valid reason to have the user's web browser as part of a game over having an in game system.
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.

#16 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 04 October 2011 - 12:05 PM

And all of those benefits and more can be had with an in game browser. Want to be able to modify the menu by driving it off an HTML based system?


I wouldn't say all. It doesn't help them at all with reducing the redundancy of having a social network compatible with their community site as well as their in game browser when they can have a single website that handles everything covering all but two platforms, which would have had to have been different anyway.

So rather than making 2 websites (1 community site and one for in game stuff) and their own browser, they made one website and a plugin.

Not to mention that the first three servers I tried joining became full by the time I tried joining.

I feel like this would probably happen with an in game browser too. There's nothing really isolated to it being in a browser that would make this a non-issue when put in an in game browser. In fact I'm fairly certain this used to happen to me all the time in counterstrike and BF 1942.

#17 NumberXaero   Prime Members   -  Reputation: 1309

Posted 04 October 2011 - 12:35 PM

Honestly, I can't think of a single good, and valid reason to have the user's web browser as part of a game over having an in game system.



Because previous battlefield games had such buggy in game browsers that most of the time people would not be able to play for the first week or till the first patch hit.
A lot of the time it would have broken features, you couldnt filter, add fiends, join through friends, it was a mess, Id rather be playing the game. Separating the browser makes total sense given the games history with browsers, now a fix is a page update not a game patch a week away. They seem to have listened and smartened up this time around.

Comparing origin to steam at this stage shouldnt be done. Origin new, Steam old, simple as that, and this is nothing more then what Valve did when they attached Steam to Half-life 2s launch. If i remember correctly, steam had a similar set of problems when it first launched.

Myself, I cant understand one tenth of the complaining going on across the net over origin. You get the game through it, you click and play. In the case of BF3, you get logged into the battle log, find a game, the plugin allows access and launches the game. Ive seen third party stats sites that allow you to launch the game through a url, whats the big deal if an official plugin does it.

The in game configuration can be argued. But if you cant see what effect the setting change had on performance without being in a single player or multiplayer game then whats the point of just changing the options outside the game. The last two games I remember that really allow you to change the settings out of the game were Max Payne 1 and Hitman 2, they had a launch dialog at the start before the game ever ran. Most games still require the game to startup before setting anything, and some of those wont apply the settings before the game restarts, but like I said whats the point if you cant see what effect the change had. BF3 makes changes in game, you see the result as you change them.

#18 way2lazy2care   Members   -  Reputation: 782

Posted 04 October 2011 - 12:43 PM

The in game configuration can be argued. But if you cant see what effect the setting change had on performance without being in a single player or multiplayer game then whats the point of just changing the options outside the game.


I will say from experience that if you have an underpowered PC, but can run games on minimum settings, defaulting the settings to medium can make it a pain in the ass just to get into the options menu through all the lag. If the game knows your hardware ideally it should start the game on the recommended settings for your PC and then let you tweak it. Not sure how BF3 does it.

#19 NumberXaero   Prime Members   -  Reputation: 1309

Posted 04 October 2011 - 12:47 PM

When I first launched the beta it detected high settings, I went into the options and set them ultra and turned off motion blur, havent been back in those settings since.

#20 Luckless   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1679

Posted 04 October 2011 - 04:15 PM

Honestly, I can't think of a single good, and valid reason to have the user's web browser as part of a game over having an in game system.



Because previous battlefield games had such buggy in game browsers that most of the time people would not be able to play for the first week or till the first patch hit.
A lot of the time it would have broken features, you couldnt filter, add fiends, join through friends, it was a mess, Id rather be playing the game. Separating the browser makes total sense given the games history with browsers, now a fix is a page update not a game patch a week away. They seem to have listened and smartened up this time around.


Wait, so because they had problems with getting a basic menu system to function, they should: Write an external interface, write plug ins for multiple browsers, write menus as a web based service,... And this magically makes the problem easier?


How about an INGAME web browser if they insist on having a web based interface, so I don't get easily slot jumped while I sit there and wait for the full game to load?


Origin is a mess. It insists on launching as a full window, not a minimized task. When you do minimize it, it shows a popup to 'remind you' that it is still running. And there is no apparent way to disable these features. I have six tools that I use daily that load to the tray, and don't make a peep till I need them.
Old Username: Talroth
If your signature on a web forum takes up more space than your average post, then you are doing things wrong.




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS