So did EA pull a UBI with BF3?

[IAteYourMother]

The fact that I have to use Origin annoys me, but since I use Steam I've becoming accustomed to being tethered to the net. It's a multiplayer game so I've fine with that. What I don't like is that BF3 requires a web browser to do anything with the game. That's two pieces of software I need to have running before I can even play. It's bad enough I need to rely on EA to maintain Origin. In addition we have to rely on them for "browser support"?

I'll admit the web interface is slick, but I would feel alot better had that functionality been maintained in the game. Instead of a game, I feel like I'm playing a headless module. Don't even get me started on the fact that you can't create private games. Are my battlefield lan parties dead? Stupid.

Am I in the minority that really likes the browser based interface? it's fast, slick, and lets me do other random stuff on the net while I wait for stuff to load.

 

[llee]

This thread reeks of fail.

DICE has been upfront from the beginning in saying the Battlelog would be the hub from which all single player, co-op, and multiplayer games would be launched. You did a poor job of researching Battlefield 3 and now blame EA?

Come on.

 

[Corporate Thug]

MW > BF3 Single Player
BF3 > MW MP

I'm a single player person so I think I'm gonna go with MW3 (and pick up BF3 when it hits a sale, perhaps black friday).

 

[Corporate Thug]

Am I in the minority that really likes the browser based interface? it's fast, slick, and lets me do other random stuff on the net while I wait for stuff to load.

I played MP briefly on my roommate comp last night...I thought the browser was terrible.

 

[Anteaus]

This thread reeks of fail.

DICE has been upfront from the beginning in saying the Battlelog would be the hub from which all single player, co-op, and multiplayer games would be launched. You did a poor job of researching Battlefield 3 and now blame EA?

Come on.

The term "in-game browser" was used in the past regarding BF3 in various places. I agree it shouldn't have been a surprise given the coverage, but I didn't think they literally meant I'd be using Internet Explorer with a plugin. It just feels lazy. It's like they decided to save alot of money by shifting part of the developement over to their web design team. Anyways, like I said earlier I think it's a nice interface, I just would have preferred it to be in-engine.

 

[Clinkster]

The term "in-game browser" was used in the past regarding BF3 in various places. I agree it shouldn't have been a surprise given the coverage, but I didn't think they literally meant I'd be using Internet Explorer with a plugin. It just feels lazy. It's like they decided to save alot of money by shifting part of the developement over to their web design team. Anyways, like I said earlier I think it's a nice interface, I just would have preferred it to be in-engine.

I don't understand this sentiment. "It's nice, but it does not match some historical prerequisite."

I definitely prefer the web based browsing since I can more quickly navigate through server filters and whatnot without having some unbelievably clunky (I'm looking at you, BC2) interface.

Not only that, but when I queue up the game and checkmark the option to open the game when it's finished loading is awesome. I get to spend my time at my desktop responding to IMs until the VERY moment I'm able to play.

So, I approve for functionality's sake.

EDIT: On topic though, if you bought the game for the single player aspect, I do not understand why you would not have waited for reviews to come in.

 

[badb0y]

I like the Battlelog system. I can browse AT while loading .

 

[Kalmah]

I can't believe that I haven't purchased this yet. As much as I loved BF2, I've been anticipating BF3 for a long time; I even bought a new graphics card for it. But for some reason I'm hesitant. It's a combination of Origin, the price, the always-needed internet connection, the mini map sucked on the beta, and I don't see a lot of people raving about it on forums. *shrug*

How is Karkand?

 

[Capt Caveman]

People actually bought BF3 to play SP? I'll probably never launch campaign.

 

[Anteaus]

How is Karkand?

Who knows? I bought the game yesterday but have yet to get a successful game going. Client problems then server problems then outages to fix the server problems then repeat server problems. The longest I've played any particular match was about 2 minutues and I've only been able to login to maybe 4 servers.

 

[Kalmah]

Who knows? I bought the game yesterday but have yet to get a successful game going. Client problems then server problems then outages to fix the server problems then repeat server problems. The longest I've played any particular match was about 2 minutues and I've only been able to login to maybe 4 servers.

Yikes. How does this happen after like a month of beta? This isn't acceptable. I'm going to have to become a budget-bin gamer or these companies are going to have to get their shit together before release. It's sad to hear, I really want to play. Was gonna pick up a cheap indie game on steam to tide me over but no good deals right now. poo

 

[frozentundra123456]

Personally I thought the SP campaign in BC2 was dreadful. Nobody should buy a Battlefield game with the expectation of a great campaign. No-doubt multiplayer is their primary focus, and rightfully so.

Why "rightfully so"? For sixty bucks couldnt they make a decent single player storyline also? I only play single player, so this game is pretty much out for me. If it gets cheap in a year or two I might pick it up. But there is so much hoopla about this game I doubt that it will get cheap for a long time.

I did buy BC2 after it got cheap, and thought the single player was OK. Maybe better than the over the top mess that was MW2, but not as good as COD4:MW or the earlier "real" COD games when they made them for the PC.

 

[frozentundra123456]

SP in BC2 was the only thing I liked about it.

Interesting to see that it's ok for BF3 to require an always on internet connection for even SP but any other game its the devil. lolz, bf fanboys.

Exactly what I was thinking also. Hope EA doesnt force this onto Mass Effect 3.

 

[frozentundra123456]

MW > BF3 Single Player
BF3 > MW MP

I'm a single player person so I think I'm gonna go with MW3 (and pick up BF3 when it hits a sale, perhaps black friday).

My plan too. I doubt it will get cheap by black friday though. Although if enough people are pissed of about the always on internet requirement, it might get cheap sooner than I thought. But since I want Skyrym right away and MW3 and Mass Effect, definitely cant afford more than 20 or 30 bucks for BF3.

 

[PrayForDeath]

EA sent an email on the 24th to all EA/Origin account holders stating that an internet connection IS REQUIRED to play the game, regardless of the mode. This has been fairly common knowledge for a while.

I had no idea SP required an internet connection.

 

[Northern Lawn]

Why "rightfully so"? For sixty bucks couldnt they make a decent single player storyline also? I only play single player, so this game is pretty much out for me.

I don't think they should waste any of there time or creativity on single player campaigns for games intended to be primary Multi Player platforms.

$60? I played 920 hours of BC2 multi player and less then one hour on the single player, I got my moneys worth.

 

[PrayForDeath]

I don't think they should waste any of there time or creativity on single player campaigns for games intended to be primary Multi Player platforms.

$60? I played 920 hours of BC2 multi player and less then one hour on the single player, I got my moneys worth.

I remember the days of RTCW where the singleplayer was a superb 20 hour experience, and the multiplayer would keep you hooked for hundreds of hours. Oh, and the game wasn't even $60.

Seems those days are gone.

 

[Northern Lawn]

I remember the days of RTCW where the singleplayer was a superb 20 hour experience, and the multiplayer would keep you hooked for hundreds of hours. Oh, and the game wasn't even $60.

Seems those days are gone.

You played Return to Castle Wolfenstein for HUNDREDS OF HOURS? It was a great game but give me a break. Mind you I played Far Cry 5 times and System Shock II for about a hundred hours but I... never mind. I'm babbling

 

[frozentundra123456]

I don't think they should waste any of there time or creativity on single player campaigns for games intended to be primary Multi Player platforms.

$60? I played 920 hours of BC2 multi player and less then one hour on the single player, I got my moneys worth.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to mine.

But I dont think all the "creativity" of the programmers is used up making a multiplayer game. I think it is just a matter of taking the lazy way out. Maybe they should have used the resources they put into the always on DRM and put them into making a good single player campaign. I am sure the DRM will be cracked anyway and only the honest customers that bought the game legally will be punished.

 

[dpodblood]

Am I in the minority that really likes the browser based interface? it's fast, slick, and lets me do other random stuff on the net while I wait for stuff to load.

I agree. I also like the browser based system. I especially like the fact that it gives me access to my stats, even when I'm not at my home PC. Beyond that it's not really much different from an in game menu. The game is very quick at switching from full screen to windowed when it needs to, so it doesn't really cause any problems.

 

[dpodblood]

Why "rightfully so"? For sixty bucks couldnt they make a decent single player storyline also? I only play single player, so this game is pretty much out for me. If it gets cheap in a year or two I might pick it up. But there is so much hoopla about this game I doubt that it will get cheap for a long time.

I did buy BC2 after it got cheap, and thought the single player was OK. Maybe better than the over the top mess that was MW2, but not as good as COD4:MW or the earlier "real" COD games when they made them for the PC.

I say rightfully so because that's where the majority of players are going to spend the majority of their time. If you are a fan of the Battlefield series or do any research on it than you will know that multiplayer has always been the focus. In fact I don't believe any of the other Battlefield games even had a SP campaign (not including BC). It doesn't excuse having a crappy SP campaign, but it's certainly forgivable considering the value in 100's of hours of multiplayer. If you're a SP only kind of person that's fine, but you are much better off waiting for the $5 sale.

 

[penske2298977]

UPDATE:

This morning, I reinstalled Origin and BF3 --- they fixed this (SP/offline issue). I can now start Origin, go "offline" and when I then click on the game icon/launcher, the game will, by default, bypass battlelog (yeah!) and go right to the SP campaign. This was not working previously, so gotta give EA credit for fixing this.


Also a tip for retail/boxed people (like me). If you uninstall Origin it will try to d/l the game. It wont recognize your installed copy (at least in my case on Vista 64 bit). You have to uninstall the game from Windows, then Origin will reinstall from the disc.

 

[dingleberrydorkbutt]

I remember the days of RTCW where the singleplayer was a superb 20 hour experience, and the multiplayer would keep you hooked for hundreds of hours. Oh, and the game wasn't even $60.

Seems those days are gone.

I loved that game too, although most of my mp time was spent with Enemy Territory.

SP games do seem to be terribly short these days.

Meanwhile, the pirated version of the SP campaign is reportedly working fine.

Exactly. All that these so-called "anti-piracy" measures do is make it harder on honest folks. The games WILL be cracked. The game makers should put more focus on the quality of the game.

 

[Shmee]

You played Return to Castle Wolfenstein for HUNDREDS OF HOURS? It was a great game but give me a break. Mind you I played Far Cry 5 times and System Shock II for about a hundred hours but I... never mind. I'm babbling

I played ETQW for over 2000 hours. All online.

 

[goobernoodles]

You played Return to Castle Wolfenstein for HUNDREDS OF HOURS? It was a great game but give me a break. Mind you I played Far Cry 5 times and System Shock II for about a hundred hours but I... never mind. I'm babbling

RTCW was/is the best game ever. You're out of your mind.