Page 28 of 142 FirstFirst ... 182425262728293031323878128 ... LastLast
Results 406 to 420 of 2118

Thread: Battlefield 3

  1. #406
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Concerning the BLOPS sales numbers. Are those 16 million including consoles?
    Yes, but the business men at EA don't care. They want BF3 to sell like COD and don't care about platforms. Hence, BF3 not being a PC exclusive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    COncerning Crysis, beleive me, I was very hyped up for Crysis prior to realease. In the end what we got was a a poorly optimized game with average single player and horrible multiplayer. Cryteks shining gem is still the original Far Cry to me.
    Okay, I'll admit that Crysis 1 multiplayer was awful.

  2. #407
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    10,752

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Concerning the BLOPS sales numbers. Are those 16 million including consoles?
    COncerning Crysis, beleive me, I was very hyped up for Crysis prior to realease. In the end what we got was a a poorly optimized game with average single player and horrible multiplayer. Cryteks shining gem is still the original Far Cry to me.
    it doesn't change the fact that Crytek wasn't afraid to take a leap and push the envelope with their graphics. Maybe the fact that it wasn't optimized is a side effect of the fact that they were designing for the future, and not for the present. I don't see why thats a bad thing. Looking back at it now, with rigs that can finally play that game at max settings it was worth the compromise because the game is still ones of the best looking out there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Sure. But BF2 did not do the numbers that MW2 and BLOPS did.

    After two months (August 2005), Battlefield 2 had sold 1.2 million copies.

    After two months (January 2011), Call of Duty: Black Ops had sold 16 million copies.
    to compare BF2 numbers to BLOPS numbers isn't fair since they're separated by over 5 years. COD2 came out around the same time and sold only 1.4 million copies. The market has grown quite a bit. Obviously these arent apples-to-apples comparisons.. i'm just pointing it out. We know that DICE wants COD numbers.. everyone wants COD numbers. If they sell a watered down version to the little retarded console nooblets out there, and as long as it doesn't obviously detract from the PC version, I don't care.. it'll probably help fund BF4


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  3. #408
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    to compare BF2 numbers to BLOPS numbers isn't fair since they're separated by over 5 years. COD2 came out around the same time and sold only 1.4 million copies. The market has grown quite a bit. Obviously these arent apples-to-apples comparisons.. i'm just pointing it out. We know that DICE wants COD numbers.. everyone wants COD numbers. If they sell a watered down version to the little retarded console nooblets out there, and as long as it doesn't obviously detract from the PC version, I don't care.. it'll probably help fund BF4
    Halo 2 had sold 6.4 million copies two months after it came out (January 2005). You just won't hit the uber-numbers on a PC exclusive, is my point.

    Battlefield 3 allegedly cost $100 million according to some websites, making it one of the most expensive video games ever. There's no way that EA would of greenlit that game if DICE had asked if they could made it only for the PC.

    I think it'll be fine. DICE seems very proud of the fact that the PC is the "lead platform". PC will have higher player count and won't be locked at 30 fps and dedicated servers. I think it will be quality PC gaming.

  4. #409
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Yes, but the business men at EA don't care. They want BF3 to sell like COD and don't care about platforms. Hence, BF3 not being a PC exclusive.



    Okay, I'll admit that Crysis 1 multiplayer was awful.
    The topic is not EAs executives wallets thickness....
    The topic is top selling PC games. I doubt CoD 4 (Activisions flasgship) sold more PC copys t=hen BF2...

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    it doesn't change the fact that Crytek wasn't afraid to take a leap and push the envelope with their graphics. Maybe the fact that it wasn't optimized is a side effect of the fact that they were designing for the future, and not for the present. I don't see why thats a bad thing. Looking back at it now, with rigs that can finally play that game at max settings it was worth the compromise because the game is still ones of the best looking out there.



    to compare BF2 numbers to BLOPS numbers isn't fair since they're separated by over 5 years. COD2 came out around the same time and sold only 1.4 million copies. The market has grown quite a bit. Obviously these arent apples-to-apples comparisons.. i'm just pointing it out. We know that DICE wants COD numbers.. everyone wants COD numbers. If they sell a watered down version to the little retarded console nooblets out there, and as long as it doesn't obviously detract from the PC version, I don't care.. it'll probably help fund BF4
    Thats all Crysis had were graphics, and I repeat it was poorly optimized.
    You say they were designing for the future, its been what 4 years since Crysis realease and still not even a machine with 4x 6990s can achives constant 60fps or higher....

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Halo 2 had sold 6.4 million copies two months after it came out (January 2005). You just won't hit the uber-numbers on a PC exclusive, is my point.

    Battlefield 3 allegedly cost $100 million according to some websites, making it one of the most expensive video games ever. There's no way that EA would of greenlit that game if DICE had asked if they could made it only for the PC.

    I think it'll be fine. DICE seems very proud of the fact that the PC is the "lead platform". PC will have higher player count and won't be locked at 30 fps and dedicated servers. I think it will be quality PC gaming.
    Yes I understand very well why they realeased it for consoles as well, cause of money. But just think what it would be like if they dedicted those 100 mil to PC only? I think it would improve it even more. In fact im hoping BF3 isnt a bugfest so they can make it pro like CS.

  5. #410
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    10,752

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post


    Thats all Crysis had were graphics, and I repeat it was poorly optimized.
    You say they were designing for the future, its been what 4 years since Crysis realease and still not even a machine with 4x 6990s can achives constant 60fps or higher....
    47FPS on CF 6990's at eyefinity res with max shaders and 2x Multi-sample AA
    http://hardocp.com/article/2011/05/1...vidia_vs_amd/7

    Bitch all you want about it not being optimized, but its still pushing hardware from today to the limit and looks damn good doing it. Why is that a bad thing? So what if it runs like a pig.... better than running well and looking like a pig I don't even care about the story.. I'm just saying that pushing the envelope is good


    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Yes I understand very well why they realeased it for consoles as well, cause of money. But just think what it would be like if they dedicted those 100 mil to PC only? I think it would improve it even more. In fact im hoping BF3 isnt a bugfest so they can make it pro like CS.
    Whats the point? What if I dedicated 200 million to it? that would make it super duper good right? The point is, EA WOULD NEVER spend $100 million on it for PC alone, so to make a statement like that is completely irrelevant. In fact, thinking about it that way, its probably a good thing that its on consoles, since DICE can spend so much on making it a kick ass engine and then working scaling it back to consoles, since otherwise they wouldn't have the capital to do half of what they're doing now.


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  6. #411
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Yes I understand very well why they realeased it for consoles as well, cause of money. But just think what it would be like if they dedicted those 100 mil to PC only? I think it would improve it even more. In fact im hoping BF3 isnt a bugfest so they can make it pro like CS.
    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    Whats the point? What if I dedicated 200 million to it? that would make it super duper good right? The point is, EA WOULD NEVER spend $100 million on it for PC alone, so to make a statement like that is completely irrelevant. In fact, thinking about it that way, its probably a good thing that its on consoles, since DICE can spend so much on making it a kick ass engine and then working scaling it back to consoles, since otherwise they wouldn't have the capital to do half of what they're doing now.
    ^ What he said.

    You started this debate (Poci) by saying "I wish BF3 was PC exclusive." With all due respect, that's like saying "I wish I could flap my arms and get to the moon."

    There's no way this game could have been made as a PC exclusive, which is the point I've been trying to make all along. DICE knows who their longtime fans are, and I think they'll take care of us by making BF3 awesome on the PC.

  7. #412
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Activate: AMD View Post
    47FPS on CF 6990's at eyefinity res with max shaders and 2x Multi-sample AA
    http://hardocp.com/article/2011/05/1...vidia_vs_amd/7

    Bitch all you want about it not being optimized, but its still pushing hardware from today to the limit and looks damn good doing it. Why is that a bad thing? So what if it runs like a pig.... better than running well and looking like a pig I don't even care about the story.. I'm just saying that pushing the envelope is good



    Whats the point? What if I dedicated 200 million to it? that would make it super duper good right? The point is, EA WOULD NEVER spend $100 million on it for PC alone, so to make a statement like that is completely irrelevant. In fact, thinking about it that way, its probably a good thing that its on consoles, since DICE can spend so much on making it a kick ass engine and then working scaling it back to consoles, since otherwise they wouldn't have the capital to do half of what they're doing now.
    To tie both subjects of BF3 and crysis.
    Wanna bet BF3 looks and runs a million times better then Crysis?

  8. #413
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Central NJ
    Posts
    10,752

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    To tie both subjects of BF3 and crysis.
    Wanna bet BF3 looks and runs a million times better then Crysis?
    if you don't think this fact is irrelevant, you've missed the point of my argument altogether


    Trust me, I do science
    My Hardware, Past and Present

  9. #414
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Yeah your point is no way bf3 could be PC exclusive and I disagree with your point.

  10. #415
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Yeah your point is no way bf3 could be PC exclusive and I disagree with your point.
    Then you, quite frankly, don't understand or don't accept the reality of the video game business.

    This isn't the Doom era where bros sit around in their garage and program games they think would be teh badass. Video game development is funded by billion-dollar corporations with executives and shareholders who want to see a return on their investment.

    Battlefield 3 would not be what it was if it was a PC exclusive. Period. End of argument.

  11. #416
    Joined
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Vegas
    Posts
    1,972

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Poci View Post
    Yeah your point is no way bf3 could be PC exclusive and I disagree with your point.
    I also disagree. But it just would not make any sense to make BF3 a PC exclusive. Yes it would be possible but it would make as much sense as painting wings on a pig and throwing it out the window of an airplane.
    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    Battlefield 3 would not be what it was if it was a PC exclusive. Period. End of argument.
    I disagree. It could be done the financial reward obviously would be substantially less. Like I have said before... back in the day, making video games was more about the art... and whole lot le$$ about the money.

    Bottom line is that it would be just stupid for BF3 to be a PC exclusive, however that does not mean that its impossible.

    BF3 Dino:
    i7 2600k, ASUS P8Z68-V Pro, 8GB Corsair, X-25M 120GB, WD 300GB Raptor, 2xEVGA GTX570HD 2.5GB, X-fi Titanium, Antec 1200W.
    Monster: i7 930, MSI X58 Platinum, 9GB Corsair, WD 74GB Raptor, WD 2TB, Palit GTX460 1GB, PCP&C 750W.
    Beast: AMD4400+, Asus A8N-SLI Deluxe, 2GB Corsair, 2x 1TB WD Green Raid0, 2TB WD Green, KFA2 9600GT, Dynex 500W.
    Relic: Intel P4 3.2GHz, Asus P4SD-LA, 1.5 GB PC2700, 160GB WD, 120GB Maxtor, ATI 9600Pro, Dynex 500W.

  12. #417
    Joined
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,742

    Re: Battlefield 3

    BF3 really should be pc exclusive.

    Bad company is the console version of the battlefield series. 1942 and bf2 were pc only. I played both.

    I understand the reasoning from a business standpoint. But that doesnt mean i agree with it.

    I want a major fps to be exclusive to the pc again.....

  13. #418
    Joined
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    Posts
    6,010

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by tjdehya View Post
    I disagree. It could be done the financial reward obviously would be substantially less. Like I have said before... back in the day, making video games was more about the art... and whole lot le$$ about the money.

    Bottom line is that it would be just stupid for BF3 to be a PC exclusive, however that does not mean that its impossible.
    Well, regarding the rumored $100 million budget for production of BF3, I doubt EA would give a game that amount of budget to be a PC exclusive.

    A PC only BF3 would be different from what we're seeing. There's no way it would have the budget it did if it was a PC exclusive.

    And that's the point I'm trying to make.

  14. #419
    Joined
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Florida
    Age
    31
    Posts
    2,742

    Re: Battlefield 3

    Quote Originally Posted by Keven View Post
    A PC only BF3 would be different from what we're seeing. There's no way it would have the budget it did if it was a PC exclusive.
    The truth.

    Its sad, but true.

  15. #420
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    In bed with one of my avatar AMD girls :D
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,876

    Re: Battlefield 3

    So PC games dont have big budgets?

    Doom 3 originally didnt have a big budget from ID?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •