- Status
[citation][nom]palladin9479[/nom]Your thinking like a user not a developer. There is no sun, there is no heat in a video game. NV glass's are just the engine rendering differently, no actual physics checks are being done for heat values. Thus from a developers point of view it's working exactly as intended, they just never coded it to not work in some places. To fix it they would have to recode part of the graphics engine, then insert some sort of "no IR" flag onto the various sections of maps. That would be the quick and dirty way, would still have people standing in shaded (IR on) areas using it, but would mostly fix it. The real solution would be to redo part of the graphics engine to calculate ambient light values and use those as a bias against the rendered image when in "IR" mode. Of course they'd have to redo every light source to include a "IR / no-IR" flag so the bias wouldn't use regular non-IR light.See nothing is ever as simple as it appears.[/citation]
"IR / no-IR" flag is not needed, just light sources should be made visible in IR mode. All light sources, except chemical cold light, are emitting both visible and IR light.
"IR / no-IR" flag is not needed, just light sources should be made visible in IR mode. All light sources, except chemical cold light, are emitting both visible and IR light.
[citation][nom]jakall[/nom]Battlefield 3 is the disappointment of the year for me.I do not play multi player, so single player is all that matters for me.In single player this game sucks so bad, is a blatant copy of MWxxx, it`s crazy. But the game just feels put together from pieces, it feels broken. And it also feels like a copy. A bad one.So, no patch is going to fix this.A turd will be still a turd, no matter the polish.Better work harder next time, and try not to copy, try to innovate, my advice for the DICE team.[/citation]
Herp derp.
Herp derp.
[citation][nom]jackoff[/nom]@jakallReally? A blatant copy of MW? Don't you mean a blatant copy of well I don't know, the hundreds of war movies/books/tv shows that came out before MW? Also, if you had put any research into the BF series, BF has always been about the multiplayer experience.[/citation]
The hundreds of war movies/books/tv shows that came out before MW are not video games. This IS a video game. Copied from ANOTHER VIDEO GAME. So, this is a copy. MW series is ok, because is allows you to play a video game, instead of buying a book, going to a movie, etc. It is ok, because it is PLAYABLE. It draws you in. The story is there. The action is there. It is fun stuff.
BF3... not so much. The story does not draw you in. The action sucks, is just a bad copy paste from MW, but without giving you the feeling you are there. That is the whole point of a video game. To put you in the character`s shoes, and to dive you in. BF3 failed at this so badly.
And I said it in my first post, I do not need multi player. Single player only. So no comments complaining that BF series is all about multi player, I only buy a game for single player use. You can enjoy its multi player action all you want, for me it is irrelevant.
The hundreds of war movies/books/tv shows that came out before MW are not video games. This IS a video game. Copied from ANOTHER VIDEO GAME. So, this is a copy. MW series is ok, because is allows you to play a video game, instead of buying a book, going to a movie, etc. It is ok, because it is PLAYABLE. It draws you in. The story is there. The action is there. It is fun stuff.
BF3... not so much. The story does not draw you in. The action sucks, is just a bad copy paste from MW, but without giving you the feeling you are there. That is the whole point of a video game. To put you in the character`s shoes, and to dive you in. BF3 failed at this so badly.
And I said it in my first post, I do not need multi player. Single player only. So no comments complaining that BF series is all about multi player, I only buy a game for single player use. You can enjoy its multi player action all you want, for me it is irrelevant.
I think that no one noticed how current this news is http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_company/archive/2011/11/21/multiple-fixes-and-new-squad-functionality-in-today-s-pc-patch-for-battlefield-3.aspx
Good work Mr Parrish, good as usually.
/sarcasm
Good work Mr Parrish, good as usually.
/sarcasm
[citation][nom]jakall[/nom]Battlefield 3 is the disappointment of the year for me.I do not play multi player, so single player is all that matters for me.In single player this game sucks so bad, is a blatant copy of MWxxx, it`s crazy. But the game just feels put together from pieces, it feels broken. And it also feels like a copy. A bad one.So, no patch is going to fix this.A turd will be still a turd, no matter the polish.Better work harder next time, and try not to copy, try to innovate, my advice for the DICE team.[/citation]
I'm only interested in BF3 for the multiplayer...
I'm only interested in BF3 for the multiplayer...
[citation][nom]jakall[/nom]Battlefield 3 is the disappointment of the year for me.I do not play multi player, so single player is all that matters for me.In single player this game sucks so bad, is a blatant copy of MWxxx, it`s crazy. But the game just feels put together from pieces, it feels broken. And it also feels like a copy. A bad one.So, no patch is going to fix this.A turd will be still a turd, no matter the polish.Better work harder next time, and try not to copy, try to innovate, my advice for the DICE team.[/citation]
ummm...... I guess every Battlefield game must have disappointed you then. Almost all of the BF games had a multiplayer focus, hell BF2's single player was just multiplayer maps w/bots. Thats not very innovative either but it made for 1 hell of a multiplayer game. I would recommend you stick to games with a single player focus (Skyrim, Deus Ex, DeadSpace, etc.) instead of buying games that were made almost exclusively for their multiplayer modes.
ummm...... I guess every Battlefield game must have disappointed you then. Almost all of the BF games had a multiplayer focus, hell BF2's single player was just multiplayer maps w/bots. Thats not very innovative either but it made for 1 hell of a multiplayer game. I would recommend you stick to games with a single player focus (Skyrim, Deus Ex, DeadSpace, etc.) instead of buying games that were made almost exclusively for their multiplayer modes.
amk-aka-Phantom
Distinguished
- Mar 10, 2011
- 3,004
- 0
- 20,860
Troll. CoD got NOTHING on BF3, having played both I can say that with authority. BFBC2 sucked big time in single player in the beginning, I never got past the second mission because it was boring; but I will try one day because BF3 ALMOST did the same thing to me.
First mission where you break into that train feels SO MUCH like CoD that I almost got mad ("Is THAT what all the hype is about?!", I thought), but the graphics and the fact that my card was ALMOST maxing them out was pushing me to get further, and I was not disappointed. The second mission was already great, and the fourth - with the aerial combat - was super-sweet (reminds me of Top Gun movie a lot); it made a mockery of Call of Duty's AC-130 shooting stuff.
And somehow the game feels more serious than Call of Duty. The way the characters talk, the combat, everything - I love it. I didn't play MW3 yet, but somehow I don't think it can stand next to BF3. It's just a different category. Anybody read how CoD developers got "disappointed" when DICE developers mocked CoD series? Well, DICE had EVERY right to do so. Their game is far superior.
zak_mckraken
Distinguished
- Jan 16, 2004
- 1,592
- 0
- 19,780
with the aerial combat - was super-sweet (reminds me of Top Gun movie a lot); it made a mockery of Call of Duty's AC-130 shooting stuff.
you mean that 20 minute quicktime event?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et2Q-ZO4TNU
BF3 campain was a crappy linear scripted quicktime event. so was call of duties, but then again, what more do you expect from call of duty? they stuck to exactly what they always do.
you mean that 20 minute quicktime event?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et2Q-ZO4TNU
BF3 campain was a crappy linear scripted quicktime event. so was call of duties, but then again, what more do you expect from call of duty? they stuck to exactly what they always do.
giovanni86
Distinguished
- May 10, 2007
- 466
- 0
- 18,790
[citation][nom]jakall[/nom]The hundreds of war movies/books/tv shows that came out before MW are not video games. This IS a video game. Copied from ANOTHER VIDEO GAME. So, this is a copy. MW series is ok, because is allows you to play a video game, instead of buying a book, going to a movie, etc. It is ok, because it is PLAYABLE. It draws you in. The story is there. The action is there. It is fun stuff.BF3... not so much. The story does not draw you in. The action sucks, is just a bad copy paste from MW, but without giving you the feeling you are there. That is the whole point of a video game. To put you in the character`s shoes, and to dive you in. BF3 failed at this so badly.And I said it in my first post, I do not need multi player. Single player only. So no comments complaining that BF series is all about multi player, I only buy a game for single player use. You can enjoy its multi player action all you want, for me it is irrelevant.[/citation]
Then you should have done your research before diving in then. BF2 didn't even have a campaign and i swear if it was $100 i would of bought it. BF has always been and will always only be about the multi-player, if there's a campaign thats a nice extra feature in my book when it comes to BF. On a side note MW had a very good story, unfortunately the last one was epicly short. That was disappointing in my book. Oh and the fact 100 members of the original team didn't make it. No i did not buy MW3 but you can read the reviews.
Then you should have done your research before diving in then. BF2 didn't even have a campaign and i swear if it was $100 i would of bought it. BF has always been and will always only be about the multi-player, if there's a campaign thats a nice extra feature in my book when it comes to BF. On a side note MW had a very good story, unfortunately the last one was epicly short. That was disappointing in my book. Oh and the fact 100 members of the original team didn't make it. No i did not buy MW3 but you can read the reviews.
amk-aka-Phantom
Distinguished
- Mar 10, 2011
- 3,004
- 0
- 20,860
Yeah, I mean that 20 minute quicktime event. Quicktime events don't take away from the game, they only add. The Witcher 2 had them, too, and people like you were b!tching about them, as well. So, let's see... what's better, to challenge your reaction speed by pushing a sequence of buttons quickly in order to block an enemy's punch or to just press one button to do the same? I think the first is better!
Don't get what's people's problem with QTEs, as if the game suffered because of them...
shin0bi272
Distinguished
- Nov 20, 2007
- 1,103
- 0
- 19,310
reading the patch log and several weapons got increased ranges and others got decreased damages. Which is nice because one of them is the scar-h. That thing is basically a 3 shot kill weapon and its one of the 3 reasons I quit playing this game (the flashlights and skyrim are the other 2). good to see that they are still working on a patch though.
Also @nebun... some of us have SSDs and have limited space there bub... Not gonna blow 750 bucks to get a 256gb ssd so I can have enough space to load multi-gig patches for multi-gig games and still have enough space to have more than one game on my system at a time. Thanks.
Also @nebun... some of us have SSDs and have limited space there bub... Not gonna blow 750 bucks to get a 256gb ssd so I can have enough space to load multi-gig patches for multi-gig games and still have enough space to have more than one game on my system at a time. Thanks.
dalmvern
Distinguished
- Jun 15, 2011
- 673
- 0
- 19,060
[citation][nom]cmcghee358[/nom]Furthermore, they are using IRNV.This infuriates me. I'm one of those people that goes out of their way to avoid confrontation to get to a certain point to outflank the enemy, then I rape them. This ridiculousness of using thermal imaging during the heat of day to pinpoint human beings with an external temperature that is pretty close to equal with the ambient air temperature(Human core temp is 97, human external/skin temp is closer to 80) has cost me my sanity.This type of arcade oversight I expected from MW3, this isn't what BF3 is made of. From what I gather they are going to shorten the effective range of the IRNV, but it will still operate the same. That is, will totally discount the assumed ambient air temp in relation to the human targets.* DISCLAIMER: I know it's a game *Furthermore, I have no issue with IRNV being use on night maps. InfraRed NightVision(IRNV) SHOULD be used on night maps![/citation]
I understand your frustration, but I dont think you quite grasp how IRNV works...it is not a thermal sight and doesnt detect heat signatures. This sight operates off of the absorption and reflectance of infrared light. Human skin absorbs infrared light quite differently than, say the desert landscape, so there is an obvious difference that you could pick out.
That being said, the Taclight is ridiculous. Indoors, yes I can understand being blinded by a Taclight. Outside running around, a Taclight should not appear to be another goddamn sun.
I understand your frustration, but I dont think you quite grasp how IRNV works...it is not a thermal sight and doesnt detect heat signatures. This sight operates off of the absorption and reflectance of infrared light. Human skin absorbs infrared light quite differently than, say the desert landscape, so there is an obvious difference that you could pick out.
That being said, the Taclight is ridiculous. Indoors, yes I can understand being blinded by a Taclight. Outside running around, a Taclight should not appear to be another goddamn sun.
giovanni86
Distinguished
- May 10, 2007
- 466
- 0
- 18,790
Just adding to what people are saying about the Taclight, i totally agree but as blinding as it is, have you seen what the console version looks like? Its the ugliest Taclight i have ever seen in a game. I will say the PC version might be blinding like the sun, but at least its graphically amazing and puts the console version one to shame.
theweedaman
Distinguished
- Nov 22, 2011
- 1
- 0
- 18,510
Great work DICE. Enjoying the game, even with the bugs. Every piece of software has bugs and at least there's a team willing to put in the hours to fix them, even if they don't release a patch everyday for every bug that people whine about. Think about how many more problems that would cause Dice. Having 20 patch updates a week, only for the noob user with spyware/malware on their PC and then has problems patching the game, and then raging about the patch not installing....or whatever the case may be.
Keep up the good work DICE, BF3 rocks!
Keep up the good work DICE, BF3 rocks!
dalmvern
Distinguished
- Jun 15, 2011
- 673
- 0
- 19,060
[citation][nom]hetneo[/nom]"IR / no-IR" flag is not needed, just light sources should be made visible in IR mode. All light sources, except chemical cold light, are emitting both visible and IR light.[/citation]
Also INB4 someone points out that there is no IR light to be reflected/absorbed at night...IRNV scopes are considered active remote sensing devices. It emits its own IR light so it still functions...thus the Night Vision classification.
Also INB4 someone points out that there is no IR light to be reflected/absorbed at night...IRNV scopes are considered active remote sensing devices. It emits its own IR light so it still functions...thus the Night Vision classification.
Well the patch launched today, 500ish megs, not too bad... Stability is questionable right now though, I got disconnected from Origin 3 times in an hour and the game hard-locked my system 2x... Not looking promising so far.
"Cheating & Boosting" can be fixed simply by allowing people to host un-ranked servers. Currently every server is forced to be ranked.
If you allow un-ranked servers you can put a minimum player restriction into the ranked servers. Everyone is happy and the world goes on. (People can make their 1 player to start servers, practice flight servers, etc, etc).
"Cheating & Boosting" can be fixed simply by allowing people to host un-ranked servers. Currently every server is forced to be ranked.
If you allow un-ranked servers you can put a minimum player restriction into the ranked servers. Everyone is happy and the world goes on. (People can make their 1 player to start servers, practice flight servers, etc, etc).
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News Microsoft updates Windows 11 24H2 requirements, CPU must support SSE4.2 or the OS will not boot- Started by Admin
- Replies: 14
-
-
-
Question New Build GPU help- ASRock Steel Legend OC Radeon RX 7900 GRE - Keeps turning off
- Started by bp240
- Replies: 6
-
Question How can I make my AMD GPU scale *all* resolutions to 1080p, even resolutions that are "supported" by my TV?
- Started by Sol33t303
- Replies: 7
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram