sigma3 Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Even if they do not have FCS; I hope this game gives the tank 2/3 seats (one gunner, one driver + maybe a machinegunner). Then they can give the tank more power. One-manning a tank gives a individual too much power and causes people to rush towards the tank every time... And hopefully the vehicles are locked to the other team. What you're describing is PR. And yes, the appearance of a tank in PR can be appropriately frightening. Link to post Share on other sites
Shardik Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 I dotn want too much realism in this (Im a gamer, not a re-enactor) but, I do like the idea that one man cannot man a tank all on his lonesome. One driver and One gunner would be superb. The gunner having access to be the Main cannon and an MG. Perhaps even a third character to use the external LMG too, someone whom is somewhat exposed. That woudl make a tank both more and less powerful imho. Link to post Share on other sites
Shardik Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 Double Post! Link to post Share on other sites
sigma3 Posted June 13, 2011 Report Share Posted June 13, 2011 I dotn want too much realism in this (Im a gamer, not a re-enactor) but, I do like the idea that one man cannot man a tank all on his lonesome. One driver and One gunner would be superb. The gunner having access to be the Main cannon and an MG. Perhaps even a third character to use the external LMG too, someone whom is somewhat exposed. That woudl make a tank both more and less powerful imho. Again, this is how PR does it. The third position (actually "commander") is VERY useful in situations where you have one, because it's one more set of eyes available to scan for threats in 360°. With the lethality of PR, and long respawn times of heavy assets, that's essential. It might be nice if BF3 did it the same way, but I wouldn't hold your breath. Link to post Share on other sites
adadqgg Posted June 15, 2011 Report Share Posted June 15, 2011 What you're describing is PR. And yes, the appearance of a tank in PR can be appropriately frightening. I know, I play PR. Link to post Share on other sites
vorpalbunnie Posted June 17, 2011 Report Share Posted June 17, 2011 http://kotaku.com/5812902/battlefield-3-looks-just-fine-on-console-thanks Hey look! It doesnt look like total ###### on consoles! hooray! Link to post Share on other sites
Shardik Posted June 19, 2011 Report Share Posted June 19, 2011 Oh yeah, You can totally tell what colour nasal hairs those US marines have on the PC version as opposed to the console version! Link to post Share on other sites
Jagdraben Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 Finally saw the Rolling Thunder (or whatever) video. I don't see what's so controversial about T-72s being slaughtered by Abrams. Every time in the history of those tanks that they've gone head-to-head, the T-72s have been single-sidedly slaughtered by the Abrams. Nothing new, here. That being said, when the guy stopped to shoot, he was being more than a bit stupid. Link to post Share on other sites
Shardik Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 I dont see the argument really. Regardless of what side your on, your tank will always be victorious unless the storyline dictates otherwise. CoD3 and its 3 shermans slaughtering their way through a batallion of Tiger and Panzers anyone? Link to post Share on other sites
Forti Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 If you want even sided tank combat, go play World of Tanks Link to post Share on other sites
Stuey Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 That being said, when the guy stopped to shoot, he was being more than a bit stupid. Not in the game - AI's accuracy was so lousy he was perfectly safe. I hope on the higher difficulty setting enemies present more of a challenge. I dont see the argument really. Regardless of what side your on, your tank will always be victorious unless the storyline dictates otherwise. And this. If this was a Russian game, it would be the other way round! Link to post Share on other sites
FireKnife Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 CoD3 and its 3 shermans slaughtering their way through a batallion of Tiger and Panzers anyone? Yeah because that happened in real life But all games are like that, the side you play is the side that wins, simple. Though you do get the odd casualties (can't forget the number of player characters that Modern Warfare and Black Ops killed off when the story needed it). 'FireKnife' Link to post Share on other sites
LordElpus Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 If you want even sided tank combat, go play World of Tanks even sided? ha. haha. hahahahahahahahahaha! Cool game though, just don't expect good matchmaking after tier 4 Link to post Share on other sites
Stuey Posted June 21, 2011 Report Share Posted June 21, 2011 even sided? ha. haha. hahahahahahahahahaha! Cool game though, just don't expect good matchmaking after tier 4 Not quite - even sided, yes. But also no fun for the lower half/third of the team. They could improve most people's main complaint by simply reducing the maximum tier difference to about half what it is now. Sorted Even at the moment, it great fun up to about tier 3/4. Link to post Share on other sites
Forti Posted June 23, 2011 Report Share Posted June 23, 2011 Well, by even sided I meant better than one dude in a tank and everyone else running around getting killed instead of switching to engineer Link to post Share on other sites
k30dxedle Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I dont see the argument really. Regardless of what side your on, your tank will always be victorious unless the storyline dictates otherwise. CoD3 and its 3 shermans slaughtering their way through a batallion of Tiger and Panzers anyone? This. The thread's titled "Battlefield 3" and not "Yay jingoism!" for a reason, anyway. Speaking of which, I do hope they fix the ubiquitous "reflex/holographic sight reticle appearing when you're not looking through it" thing, for lack of a better word or eleven. I'm not too worried though; after all, they've already fixed the AR-15 reload animation. Also, fingers crossed for a G3. Link to post Share on other sites
Stuey Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 This. The thread's titled "Battlefield 3" and not "Yay jingoism!" for a reason, anyway. Speaking of which, I do hope they fix the ubiquitous "reflex/holographic sight reticle appearing when you're not looking through it" thing, for lack of a better word or eleven. I'm not too worried though; after all, they've already fixed the AR-15 reload animation. Also, fingers crossed for a G3. This thread seems to think there'll be a G3, seems highly likely given BF2 and BC2 had one. I noticed that reticle thing too, I hope someone realises that's not how it works... Also, check this image out. Wow. Link to post Share on other sites
LordElpus Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 The G3 also became the stock gun for the Assault kit in Battlefield 4 Free Link to post Share on other sites
Stuey Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 Safe to say DICE are fans, then? How good is that image of the tanker? The only thing that catches my eye and ruins is slightly is the distinct non-roundness of his microphone and its wire. Still, I honestly thought it was a photograph for the first couple of seconds! Link to post Share on other sites
Forti Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 Safe to say DICE are fans, then? How good is that image of the tanker? The only thing that catches my eye and ruins is slightly is the distinct non-roundness of his microphone and its wire. Still, I honestly thought it was a photograph for the first couple of seconds! Game engines still have limits, sadly. what with this, Skyrim and Red Orchestra all hitting at once, I think I need a new pc... Link to post Share on other sites
Marlowe Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 I'll probably end up buying BF3 on the wave of mass hype, play it for 20 minutes then abandon it for six months until a new Project Reality mod is created. Link to post Share on other sites
Stuey Posted June 25, 2011 Report Share Posted June 25, 2011 Game engines still have limits, sadly. what with this, Skyrim and Red Orchestra all hitting at once, I think I need a new pc... Damn, 30th August for RO2 right? Gonna be picking that one up too I think, love the original. I'll probably end up buying BF3 on the wave of mass hype, play it for 20 minutes then abandon it for six months until a new Project Reality mod is created. Marlowe plays PR??!! The actual PR team have said they're not making any more mods, they're already working on 'PR2', starting from scratch with a new engine (C4), to which they will have access to all the source code - fastropes!!!111. That's not to say there won't be realism mods for BF3, I hope there are personally. There is so. much. potential. with this new engine. It scares me Link to post Share on other sites
Shardik Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 whats this issue with the reticule I keep hearing about? Link to post Share on other sites
Stuey Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 watch the console premiere video again, look at the EOTech. You can see the reticle even when the gun is down to the player's side, like it's painted onto the glass of the sight, rather than projected inside it. Link to post Share on other sites
Forti Posted June 26, 2011 Report Share Posted June 26, 2011 Damn, 30th August for RO2 right? Gonna be picking that one up too I think, love the original. That's what I heard So pumped for that game. Gonna sit in a building with an MG42 and spray bulletts all day. In fact I think that's where BF3 nicked the suppression mechanic from. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.