It doesn’t say they made it a console game with a PC port. It simply says they switched focus in the middle of it all to make it run well on consoles as well, nothing really wrong with that, honestly.
Have you actually played the console version?
It’s essentially a stripped down, shitty looking version of BF3. A lot of the maps that were reduced slightly in size weren’t even tweaked around more to better fit the lower player count so a lot of times it feels more empty than it should.
Eh, well, what did you expect.
At least these new consoles are basically closed down PC hardware, so games should be more on par with PC from now on.
Anyone who says BF3 is a console port and means it has never played a console shooter in their lives.
Hey, I never said it’s an outright port, I’m just saying that consoles must’ve influenced the game (quite a lot IMHO, half way through is a LOT of time) - which logically must’ve hurt the PC version.
I fail to think of DICE as “PC gaming first” company ever since.
Call it personal feeling, whatever. But that’s how I see it.
BF3 is caught in a no-man’s land between platforms and even generations. EA’s policies (and their engine’s own intricate as fuck licensing issues) keeps them from making the game a “classic” PC game with full custom content support, but at the same time, the influences the consoles had over the PC version are minuscule compared to the influences the PC had over the consoles, in that the console versions are some of the worst (or most neutered) ports to a console I’ve ever seen since Orange Box on the PS3. The game just does not work for console hardware, yet they still tried to make it the same game.
The fact is, BF3’s PC support would have been the same even if consoles didn’t exist. Frostbite is a Frankenstein’s monster of different chunks of other engines and 3rd party software piled on top of 3rd party software. I could imagine one all-encompassing license for FB2 or 3 costing billions. The only reason why other companies get to use it is because they’re under that EA umbrella.
Plus, this is Dice. Before BF3, they made three really fucking good console focused games. Bad Company 1, console only, everything BF3 wasn’t. Mirror’s edge. Console focused, obviously a quick port when played on PC yet still fucking good. Bad Company 2 was a smooth PC port but still had a console focus. Still a great game. BF3, I have no idea what the fuck happened. Maybe it wasn’t the weight of PCs or Consoles that fucked it up, but the shift in weight. If they’d stayed PC all the way through, it would have been better. If they focused on consoles from the start, it would have been better.
I’m mostly talking about the campaign here, but BF3’s Multiplayer still isn’t as fun as BC2’s imo. There’s just something about the way the characters handle, the bullet speed, and the hitreg that puts me off of BF3 now. That being said, I think maybe the shift in focus hurt BF3’s campaign more than any other one thing. I’ve said it before. Dice makes good campaigns. They know how to do it. Either all the real talent left during BF3, or they just shit the bed. I don’t know.
BF: BC2 campaign wasn’t that special either. They don’t know how to make good SP, CoD does it better from my point of view, even if short and rehashed, it’s solid.
Eh, if I want a good singleplayer campaign I’d buy a game that was made to be a singleplayer game, like Bioshock.
The thing that got me about BF3’s campaign is that the AI was so terrible. And everything felt so stiff. I recently redownloaded the game and started playing on hard this time but any time I got into a firefight, it felt like the AI was always aiming at me, and not at any of my teammates and they were bullseye shots. There was that one level where you had to get inside the bank I think it was and any time I even got a little bit out of cover I’d get one-shotted. You might argue that that’s realistic but it doesn’t make for a fun campaign, especially if the entire thing is like that.
Those two statements don’t really support each other, especially considering these are the people that did Bad Company 1 and Mirror’s Fucking Edge.
Mirror’s Edge is bunch of well done acrobatic puzzles held together by a forgettable plot.
I hope the new ME has a better story.
So just because they did manage to make a decent game about an Asian chick jumping from building to building makes them military shooter experts truly.
The story and characters with forced and uninspired dialogue are nothing to brag about, for its gameplay, some missions were truly sluggish.
@Kairouseki, I thought that happens in 90% of games.
There was very little that was uninspired about BC1. It was and still is one of a kind. It wasn’t a military shooter, it was a guys-in-military-that-don’t-take-shit-seriously shooter. Also yeah, they made a good game with a shit story (well, it was going to have a decent story too, but it got cut). They should have been able to do that again. It doesn’t matter what the fuck it’s about, talent carries over. The people made a good stealth game about a Tex Avery style anthropomorphic raccoon thief made an equally good open world third person shooter about a guy with powers in the ruins of a city.
Wasn’t inFamous more of a brawler than a shooter? Cole can’t use guns because they blow up in his hand.
His hands were guns essencially. All the upgrades you get are functionally different types of guns.
- rocket launchers, grenades, blades,[color=’#151515’]*etc.
[color=’#151515’]* jetpack, grapple hook, shields,
Infamous: Second Son is currently the next-gen-console-exclusive-game I’m most interested in.
EDIT: On-topic: I hope the release version of BF4 has less connectivity issues. I’ve found BF3 and the BF4 beta to both be barely playable due to very frequent disconnects.
Yeah, BF series’ hitreg went from untrustworthy to plain awful.
Doesn’t he shoot lightning?
I’m gonna buy it due to being able to get it at half price already in a store, but god fucking dammit; it doesn’t release until the 31th here in Denmark.