Ben-DutkaIf you've been involved in the Battlefield 3 beta, what do you think?
If you check around the Internet, you'll see some concerns amongst those who have sampled the BF3 beta test on the PlayStation 3, and that includes lower-resolution textures and some iffy character detailing. Developer DICE has really pushed their new Frostbite 2.0 engine, but is it falling flat before it even gets started? Or are too many people overreacting? It is a beta, after all, and some are saying the PS3 version looks basically the same as the 360 version.
That being said, who knows what to expect? Based on the bevy of information hitting forums and communities everywhere, there's some definite concern, despite a lot of satisfied testers. So the question is whether or not that feedback has gotten back to DICE, and whether or not they'll maintain their stance; i.e., the claim that BF3 will look and play the same on both the PS3 and 360. For the most part, we believe EA will deliver a fantastic experience, but don't forget about the competition…a little game called Modern Warfare 3 .
Related Game(s): Battlefield 3
In my opinion the Beta is absolutely gorgeous. Having said that, I think people are over reacting because they fear that their precious playstation or xbox isn't living up to the standards the next generation of graphics the PC is setting.The majority of console gamers don't realize that the upgrades capable on PC's will outdo the graphics on current generation consoles anyday so long as technology advances which it is doing more rapidly than ever. And that will remain true until new consoles are released, and the same cycle will happen all over again. DICE has done a great job on all platforms on launch of the beta, sure their are a few minor bugs and glitches yet to be fixed, bu that's expected of a beta.
Could not have said it better myself!
I will still be getting it day one – as I have pre-ordered it… 🙂
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
I have a gaming pc and a ps3, and have played the beta on both of them just because I wanted to see how my pc would run this so called beast of an engine. I can run it on ultra settings on my pc and get about 30-40 frames depending on whats going on, and it does look stunning, however I can't kill anyone on that setting because the lower frames give me a disadvantage online. Anyway I'm going to share with you all my findings and the main differences between the two versions.
However, before I changed the settings to ultra it was default set on high and to be honest it looked very close to the ps3 version except for 2 things. One, the water reflections on the ps3 version are sky only so the reflections look awkward when there is a river going under a bridge and you don't see the bridge anywhere just the sky.
Thing number two and I think this is what stood out the most was the animations. The models seem to be more animated on the pc version and much smoother when they move and change stances. Also the characters are doing more things an example would be they readjust the grip on there guns. Overall the models just look more fluid and organic.
But anyone claiming the ps3 version is garbage needs an eye check and a reality check. Gaming pcs are going to outperform the ps3 any day of the week if they are running new hardware. So crying that the graphics dont look like the videos you saw is pointless.
I was worried about the ps3 version and only got it for the ps3 instead of pc because all my friends were and I thought it was going to look like poo. But I was pleasantly surprised to say the least.
So final verdict is unless you have a beast pc that can play it at ultra with high frame rates, your not going to get a game that looks like it does in those videos. Most pc players are going to be running it with it looking slightly better and more fluid than the ps3 version. I havent seen the xbox version but I doubt it will look much different, better or worse, than the ps3.
What the beta doesnt work worth crap. Too many problems and not even close to what is suppose to be. Not even full game play and disappointing. If they dont get it together its going to be a fail just like Bad Company. MW3 is looking better now…
Only those who fell victim to the PC version hype seem to be upset. Everyone should know better by now.
Last edited by maxpontiac on 9/28/2011 9:37:57 PM
Yeah. A friend of mine got really disappointed over the graphics after seeing all those PC videos.
According to him the gameplay is very good though. A good multiplayer game.
I remember the Crysis 2 beta also had graphical concerns but that turned out well in the end.
I've played the PC Alpha trial and now the PS3 beta.
All I can say is, there really isn't much difference between the two. A lot of what we've seen to be super awesome graphics is single player stuff, which is going to always be better looking. Single player doesn't have to process as much as multiplayer and in order to get things smooth they keep the data to a minimum.
As for the hype surrounding Fostbite 2 engine, I can see the difference. What most people don't understand in working with a new engine is that its like when the new consoles come out, you work with what you know how to do first which results in mildly better textures and graphics. Later you have more experience with it and this results in awesome stuff.
In addition , DICE have said that this new engine is very scalable to the next generation of consoles, which I think was there intention anyway, make a new engine now that we get the most use out of use later.
It always seems to me that beta are not that different in gameplay and graphics when the final product comes out. I think of a beta as a demo of the game.
That's probably often the case, but lets not forget both the Mass Effect 2 demo and the Crysis 2 beta. They both had obvious problems that they managed to iron out before launch and ended up being excellent products (at least in my opinion).
Last edited by Beamboom on 9/29/2011 3:33:38 AM
I personally don't think Mass Effect 2 is great graphically. The CGI though is really good. Gameplay wise I constantly ask myself how it's pulling high numbers graphically. To me it's not much improved over the demo.
To be specific (I wish I knew the name of the quest) there is a part in the game where you must fly a little ship and make your way across landscapes, the ground was so terrible It looked like 3d dot game heroes, minus the intent. To me most objects look flat and not at all detailed. Luckily the game is good.
you took probably the worse part of the game, graphically speaking, thats only about 5% of the actual game to judge it as a whole?
That is the worst part indeed – to me it looked like something that were slapped on in the last minute, like a bad dlc. It was the only quest I never finished in that game and that says something cause I loved every second of the rest of the game.
But regarding the demo as far as I recall we found both highly unstable framerate and screen tearing in there, and the sequence used in the demo ran much smoother in the full game.
Last edited by Beamboom on 9/30/2011 3:14:27 AM
Nothing can live up to the kind of hype that's been built for this.
Just what I was thinking.
Plenty of people have been hyping this game to be the best FPS of all time, the saviour of the FPS genre, the "best product on the market", etc. Now the hype train comes in, and some people in the way will be rammed hard!
I know. It's like when people were hyping FF7 to be the best Final Fantasy when really FF6 still held that torch.
Oh snap!
But seriously, this game is overhyped, but I'm still expecting something pretty amazing.
Nah son, FF 7 > FF 6, but that's a whole other story and debate.
"I know. It's like when people were hyping FF7 to be the best Final Fantasy when really FF6 still held that torch."
Agreed
I don't recall much hype over 7 except over the use of polygons, when it came out then it just obliterated 6 in every single way anyway so it was more post-release hype which has only grown over the years.
If I remember right FF7 was the first huge RPG to come off the shelves and one of the driving factors to sales of the Playstation at that time. We did have Wild Arms then, which I thought was great in its own right, but FF7 was definitely the first huge RPG which put the Playstation in the limelight. I know many people at that time were buying a Playstation just for FF7 and were later surprised at the other software that ended up coming in the future.
The thing about the people that were playing FF7 is that they wanted it so bad, they would buy a Playstation just for that game. People that otherwise had no reason before to get a Playstation all buying them at the same time was definitely a boost for Sony.
We are getting way off topic though. I should never ruffle feathers like this, and I apologize, but sometimes my uhhhh fingers slip.
Last edited by ZenChichiri on 9/29/2011 2:11:55 AM
I just don't get why people are getting so touchy and nip picking the bf3 beta, its a beta. It's like people are expecting the retail version when clearly it's not. Does the beta have problems yes, but thinking this will be like the retail version judging off a beta, is so dumb. I guaranteed knowing how good dice is they will fix the problems thats in the beta before the game comes out.
The full retail version comes out in a month. How different can the game be from the beta in a month?
Obviously Nas doesn't remember the Crysis 2 beta situation.
Seriously it's a beta! They are not retail versions despite how much time is left. It seriousy could be old code. The beta literally is meant to point out bugs, we should expect these hiccups. If this was a demo I'd say otherwise.
With that said, I absolutely do think the retail version will be up to what Dice has said. If it's not it will be a huge blow to there credibility and very dissapointing.
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 9/28/2011 11:34:50 PM
Agree with Big. We should all have learnt after the Crysis 2 situation. A beta is a beta, a semi-stable build of unfinished code that are guaranteed to be older than the current code.
Also, this is such a high profile launch that Dice *will* get it to work, there are no alternative. I simply refuse to believe they release anything less than smooth.
Last edited by Beamboom on 9/29/2011 2:38:55 AM
Wonder if it's the CoD fanatics that started this.
We have a new war going on and it's not gonna stop for the next 5 years.
It will stop when the COD franchise get killed
Last edited by TrophyHunter on 9/29/2011 9:03:06 AM
Who's going to kill it?
lol you're delusional. That franchise isn't going anywhere for a long time.
I think if any one knows anything about the graphical superiority of the pc, they would b wise not to set themselves up for dissappointment. But alas we live in an age where consoles are the supposed "end all" in gaming. People forget the PC exists.
Agree, when it comes to graphic PC is always on top, it's just that to achieve top-notch graphic it's too expensive.
And developers never put any effort onto PC like they do on consoles, they just expect you to upgrade your PC in order to play their games.
We should have learned that with Alan Wake. How awesome did that game look on those high powered PC's when demoed, and how inferior was thefinal version to those? The end result still good, great looking game no doubt, butas good as it was led to, nah not at all.
The graphics look basically the same as the multiplayer section of Medal of Honor. DICE and EA have over hyped this game to the extreme. It's just not a pretty game at all. Not the mention there is a ton of screen tearing too. Seems to be a constant problem with the Frostbite engine.
Last edited by Jawknee on 9/29/2011 12:13:10 AM
Maybe they had help from Ubisoft.
i like the game but i dont really look that hard to see the faults. i'll tell you one thing though, i hate that damn flashlight. even teammates blind me with that thing. also they dont differentiate enemies from friends enough. i dont know how much times i got killed by someone that i thought was a teammate because he had some blue crap above their heads.
i gotta say ive been really disappointed by it.
both graphically and the amount of bugs in it!
i mean its making the resistance 3 beta look like the KZ3 beta!
i cant play for 1 minute without falling through the environment, getting stuck in something, see floating dead bodies, have the environment flicker in and out of existence.
not to mention LAG GALORE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i cant believe this is actually BUGGIER then the freaking alpha!
how the hell does that work!?
yea DICE say the beta client is 1 month old, but even if it is how can a game be this buggy 2 months before release!?
how can the game be buggier 2 months from release then it was what 5 months before release?
"__________" disappointed? Nah, never!!
be gone troll!
i played it at a expo and really liked it yeh graphics are no where near as good as pc but its still good
Just downloaded the 360 version after two days with the PS3 and there is no debate about which one is better looking. They look equally awful.
I wish this whole "frostbite 2 will be the most amazing looking blah blah" hype had never started, because expectations are gonna kill it. Its a shame too, because the Battlefield series kills COD in the gameplay department. Thats what they should have been hyping up.
i have seen both versions and let's just say i was not impressed. it seems frostbite 2.0 has fallen flat on its face. ea hyped up frostbite 2.0 then they come out with a weak looking beta that looks about as good as the medal of honor mutiplayer. you would think ea would have learned a lesson during the crysis 2 mp demo on the ps3. the reaction to it was so bad that ea yanked the demo off psn after a few days. the final crysis 2 game ended up looking pretty good but i am sure that the ps3 mp demo cost crytek some sales on ps3 version.
i warned people about ea using pc footage in their trailers. they did the same thing with moh. i saw screenshots of that game and thought it looked great then i pop in moh on my ps3…one ugly looking game. dice needs to contact guerilla games(kz3 developer) so they can find out why kz3 looks like it is light years ahead of any fps shooter out there.
ben asked the question about hype awhile back. is it a good thing? it can be a good thing but if a developer does not meet expectations they will pay a price. that is exactly what is going on here.
i couldn't care less about the graphics or the hype surrounding it. If it looks anywhere near what BFBC2 looks like then i'll be plenty satisfied. I just want to know if it plays as awesome as i expect it to. Thats all
My one concern is the trend EA's compnaies are currently in. Madden NFL, Ncaa football, and its Sims franchise are currently glitchy games that EA has dropped the ball on. They seem to feel they can just put out a game half @ss then patch it up a few times to make it half way playable.
I hear that the NHL and FIFA titles are solid though. And I know this has nothing to do with Battlefield but it is being put out by EA. I only worry about if EA hasnt just hitched thier car to the money train as is the case with Activision and the way they are just rehasing new maps and expecting people to buy them.
Last edited by wackazoa on 9/29/2011 10:39:44 AM
I'm still waiting for the Open Beta. I can't access it yet.
After months and months of talk from DICE and EA about how BF3 was going to compete with MW3 i'm shocked that they would release a beta in this bad of shape. I wish they would've not released this Bug filled,Glitchy beta at all. I had better thoughts about BF3 BEFORE i played this beta. The more i play it the more i'm considering cancelling my Pre-order of BF3(if i can) and just going with my MW3 pre-order. I will give them,(DICE/EA) givin that it's just a beta,the chance to fix the NUMEROUS issues with this beta before the 10th. I played the BFBC2 beta and it was no where near as messed up as this.Not even close to this messed up. And it turned out to be a GREAT game. Untill the cheaters took over BFBC2 i played it all the time cause it was a great game. I liked it so much i got a platinum. The thought of BF3 being even better than BFBC2 was just amazing. I was so stoked i Pre-ordered it as soon as i could.
I got the Beta tuesday and played it for several hours and again yesterday for several hours and i gotta say;"If nothing changes by the 10th i'm going with MW3".
As much as i can't stand Activisions policies and COD Players(95% to 99% of them anyway). I know without a doubt that MW3 will be built with the highest quality standards possible.FOR SURE.NO DOUBT ABOUT IT. It's the COD PLAYERS who EXPLOIT,HACK,and CHEAT on COD games that ruin what is always a very good,high quality,FPS game. Not that i think COD games are perfect cause there NOT. They have their issues too.But at least i can count on MW3 being more of the same high quality fun,till it's HACKED,EXPLOITED,and Lag Switched to it's death as the last Infinity Ward release.
I can't say that about BF3 and DICE/EA right now.RIGHT NOW TODAY I can't. As much as i would like to,I just can't. What a drag. I was really hoping that BF3 was going to be something special. Something that would get me away from COD games forever maybe. But as of now i don't see that happening. I'm not alone either. I have several friends on my friends list who are or used to be DIE HARD BF fans and they ALL feel the same as i do about this messed up beta.
All the TALK from DICE and EA about how BF3 was going to compete with MW3 bla,bla,bla. And they release this Super Buggy Glitched out beta…WOW. What was DICE & EA thinking? If anything,this beta will be BOOSTING MW3 Pre-order sales,unless they can somehow fix it before the 10th. What a shame. I really like DICE and the Battlefield games too. If you think differently than i do about this beta that's fine. Your intitled to your opinion. AND SO AM I. My opinion of BF3 right now is; DISAPPOINTED,VERY DISAPPOINTED…To say the least.
I really hope they fix this before the 10th so we can all play a sample of a game that lives up to the HYPE that DICE and EA have created.
This is what happens when you Hype a game for months and put out a sample that's pretty much CRAP.BETA OR NOT It's BAD. Millions of gamers will see for themselves today as it becomes open to all. I expect the forums to be filled with complaints.
P.S.
I recently played the R3 beta and know 1st hand that patches/updates can be implemented DAILY if needed. Although i thought the R3 beta was crap i must say that IG did there best to patch the issues in their beta Daily. Dice and EA need to do the same if they want to compete with MW3 for sales.Cause what's there now in the BF3 beta isin't helping them one bit. It's gotta be hurting them.
Last edited by BigStack007 on 9/29/2011 11:17:38 AM
I love this game so far granted a few screen tears and texturing issues remember its a beta. To receive harsh criticism for a beta is ridiculous. The gameplay is smooth and hit detection is spot on. Even in a beta phase the hit detection is better than COD
I'll take some downgraded graphics as opposed to having to drop a couple hundred bucks into my PC every few months just to be able to play the games at low detail =) I like "pop and play", just throw the game in and play it!! (well, minus the whole installation part)
A few hundred bucks every few months isn't accurate at all, unless your PC is crap to begin with. I build a top of the line system every 5-7 years or so and never have to spend hundreds every few months throughout that time. Unless I decide to add more optional hardware to it, which I tend to do since I don't use my PC's for only gaming. But mostly they are.
Last edited by Geobaldi on 9/29/2011 10:57:09 PM
Hmm when did Betas become final product?
I played the beta today.
I was very sceptic of the game, but I have to admit that I have enjoyed the beta very much. I just may purchase the game.
Still not as good as Modern Warfare to me, though. But that's just my opinion/preference.
Battlefield 3 gameplay > anything CoD anyday.
It's all subjective.