Post: Battlefield 3 is Not Perfect
Options
06-21-2011, 12:30 AM
#1
Solo
Rookie
Source: You must login or register to view this content. // By: .Solo. // 20 June '11
Battlefield 3: Better on PC...
Ok, now that I've got your attention... Battlefield 3 is an improvement over Battlefield 2. Battlefield 2 was undoubtedly one of the best PC games of its era. I reckon that it still might be a favorite game to many players. You could play against skilled opponents, without ever going online with the game. There were many diverse maps and intriguing mods.
Now, you're probably wondering why it isn't as good on console, as it is on PC; or even why it's not perfect. The thing is, that Battlefield 3 will only run at 30 frames per second on any console, whilst achieving 60 on the PC. This may not be that big of a deal, but it's definitely something that will set it back a little.
Personally, I will be extremely happy if it is just a little more smoother and polished than Battlefield: Bad Company 2. No game has achieved perfection, so don't let this deter you from buying it. The least you could do is try it and see if you like it. :y:
I don't know if you've seen this, but this is the PS3 gameplay. Go ahead, jizz.
The following 4 users say thank you to Solo for this useful post:
The following 3 users groaned at Solo for this awful post:
06-22-2011, 10:39 PM
#56
Theguy123456
Banned
Originally posted by .Solo.
BF3: Better on PC
Source: You must login or register to view this content. // By: .Solo. // 20 June '11
Ok, now that I've got your attention... Battlefield 3 is an improvement over Battlefield 2. Battlefield 2 was undoubtedly one of the best PC games of its era. I reckon that it still might be a favorite game to many players. You could play against skilled opponents, without ever going online with the game. There were many diverse maps and intriguing mods.
Now, you're probably wondering why it isn't as good on console, as it is on PC; or even why it's not perfect. The thing is, that Battlefield 3 will only run at 30 frames per second on any console, whilst achieving 60 on the PC. This may not be that big of a deal, but it's definitely something that will set it back a little.
Personally, I will be extremely happy if it is just a little more smoother and polished than Battlefield: Bad Company 2. No game has achieved perfection, so don't let this deter you from buying it. The least you could do is try it and see if you like it. :y:
Source: You must login or register to view this content. // By: .Solo. // 20 June '11
Battlefield 3: Better on PC...
Ok, now that I've got your attention... Battlefield 3 is an improvement over Battlefield 2. Battlefield 2 was undoubtedly one of the best PC games of its era. I reckon that it still might be a favorite game to many players. You could play against skilled opponents, without ever going online with the game. There were many diverse maps and intriguing mods.
Now, you're probably wondering why it isn't as good on console, as it is on PC; or even why it's not perfect. The thing is, that Battlefield 3 will only run at 30 frames per second on any console, whilst achieving 60 on the PC. This may not be that big of a deal, but it's definitely something that will set it back a little.
Personally, I will be extremely happy if it is just a little more smoother and polished than Battlefield: Bad Company 2. No game has achieved perfection, so don't let this deter you from buying it. The least you could do is try it and see if you like it. :y:
I don't know if you've seen this, but this is the PS3 gameplay. Go ahead, jizz.
I hate the hype about BF and COD
06-22-2011, 11:13 PM
#57
HowsMySHOOTING
Watch the skies, traveler
People hype the shit out of battlefield, I remember bfbc2 they were saying the same thing 'Cod killer'. Look what happened, nobody plays it now, atleast not even close to the amount of people on mw2 + black ops. Even cod4 and cod5 still have communities. Yes I know CoD also gets hyped the shit out of but people still play them till this day.
06-22-2011, 11:22 PM
#59
iNK Shot
Why Can't I Be MVP?
Originally posted by E0000B6FAF25838
It doesn't cost all that much to make a decent gaming computer. For around $500 (Something like £30
I made a computer that can run Crysis 2, Black Ops, Portal 2, and Borderlands at max settings. Also, PC gamers tend to be more loyal (aside from pirates) and play longer. Companies also don't need to go through Sony and Microsoft to do what they want with their games if they release them for computer.
But in terms of FPS, the human eye can only see at like 33.7 FPS or something like that, so there's only a small noticeable difference between 30 and 60.
I made a computer that can run Crysis 2, Black Ops, Portal 2, and Borderlands at max settings. Also, PC gamers tend to be more loyal (aside from pirates) and play longer. Companies also don't need to go through Sony and Microsoft to do what they want with their games if they release them for computer. But in terms of FPS, the human eye can only see at like 33.7 FPS or something like that, so there's only a small noticeable difference between 30 and 60.
Um...pardon? The human eye goes much higher,even over 200FPS.
06-22-2011, 11:59 PM
#60
E0000B6FAF25838
Nikolai Reznov
Originally posted by KungO
Um...pardon? The human eye goes much higher,even over 200FPS.
Yes, I realized that after I posted it. I made a post about it. I did some research on it, it's a common misconception.
06-23-2011, 12:30 AM
#62
Xx-VoiD-xX
Grunt
looks a ton better graphics wise than BC2. And for FPS that doesnt matter at all... PC Vs. Console = Console win. Due to the fact that its a hell of a lot easier to hack a oc game than it is to hack a console game... PC = Tons of nooby freaks using nobish VIP hacks. and Console = People using CFW. I think anyone would go with CFW over easily made PC game hacks... I am looking forward to buying Battelfield 3 
06-23-2011, 01:58 AM
#63
david9602
Can’t trickshot me!
Originally posted by NormL
i HIGHLY doubt people can only see 33 fps..the new mw3 will run at 60+..if we cant see at that frame rate..then why would they make a game that goes that high and stays there. DERPPPPPPPP. and pc gamers tend to be more loyal? are these all personal opinions? or something backed up by a study or research...last i knew...consoles take the cake, and have more loyalty when it comes to games. if i like the game, i stick with it..like metal gear solid 4..i played that game for nearly 3 years...3 years on one game.........cant be much more loyal than that...
he means you cant see differences there and up duhhh! :carling:
06-23-2011, 02:29 AM
#64
NeglectFate
[b][move]NGU - Home of The Virgins![/b][/move]
Originally posted by .Solo.
Interesting, attention-grabbing title much? Who would wanna read, Battlefield 3: It only plays at 30 FPS on console, but 60 FPS on PC!
"Battlefield 3 is not perfect" is not the correct title for this. That would apply that there is something wrong with the whole entire game itself. Maybe "Battlefield 3 to differ on consoles" or something along those lines. I'm sure the same people would have clicked it just the same.
Copyright © 2024, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.
