Alexnader said:
Darius Brogan said:
Alexnader said:
Darius Brogan said:
Alexnader said:
Darius Brogan said:
snip
As for your inability to obtain a good PC, bad luck man.
snip
snip
snip
You keep missing my main point, DICE never aimed for realism. Good graphics, good animations, good lighting, environmental destructability. All those were done in order to make a good game, not to simulate real life. An authentic game in short.
You also missed my point entirely about scope glint, the scope glint is not a glint. It is a permanent light source that is of the same intensity regardless of whether you're hiding in a tunnel or lying out on a hill in broad daylight. The game is not realistic. You seem to think I'm talking about real life. I know shit all about real life. I know Battlefield 3.
Finally you think realism impedes social-multiplayer? Tell that to the Arma fans who make their own fake military units and address each other by rank. There's a great video of this guy playing as a platoon commander and leading an assault on a town, all coordinated through VOIP. There's realistic health in Arma (more realistic than Battlefield at least) and they seem to do teamplay just fine.
In the end, if little things like laser sights break your experience of the game then that's your problem and you're free to stop playing. Just don't act like you've been betrayed somehow. This game was never marketed as a combat simulator and if anyone told it was then they're an idiot.
This game has been about crap like bailing out of a burning chopper, firing an unguided RPG into the cockpit of the chopper that shot you down, parachuting on top of someone and knifing them before being run over by a jeep laden with C4. All unscripted, all multiplayer.
I'm not missing your point at all, you're interpreting my comments wrong.
Realism =/= combat simulator.
Environments, lighting, effects, physics. All made to increase the experience. To make it as real as possible, while maintaining the video-game air.
No, I did not miss the point about scope-glint, I used it as more evidence that the game tried to be real, but tailored it against authenticity. Scope-glint is a real problem, and is dangerous, but only where light is present.
In BF3, it's a small super-nova. Realism tailored against itself.
Do you even know what I was talking about regarding social-multi-player?
Battlefield 3 is so powerful and loaded with 'authentic' crap that adding Split-screen isn't possible unless you want a flaming system. THAT impedes social-multi-player. SOCIAL-multi-player is the ability to be in the same room as the members of your team while playing the game.
When the game tried to be so 'Authentic' that split-screen was physically impossible, they destroyed the social aspect of the game. Sure, you can talk to people hundreds or thousand of miles away, but you're alone while gaming. Your friends have to be elsewhere, on different systems, in order to game with them.
Things like visible-spectrum laser-sights mounted on long-range rifles used in close combat, supernova-flashlights, and so much effort into lip-stick graphics that split-screen is no longer possible broke my experience in the game.
If I ever pick it up again, it's going to be for single-player campaign just so I can say that I beat it, because having, and not finishing, a game irritates me.