Battlefield 3 MP maps shrunk for consoles

I'm fine as long as its only a little smaller and they don't completely shrink the maps down, but if they don't at least get the count to 32 like freakin Killzone 2 and Homefront were able to pull off, then I'll be just a bit peeved at DICE. I mean, MAG had 256 players, easily 4x the players BF3 will have but DICE can't even handle 32? Give me a break.

I'm fine as long as its only tiny, but if they don't at least get the count to 32 like freakin Killzone 2 and Homefront were able to pull off, then I'll be just a bit peeved at DICE. I mean, MAG had 256 players, easily 4x the players BF3 will have but DICE can't even handle 32? Give me a break.

SPYDER0416

I'm fine as long as its only a little smaller and they don't completely shrink the maps down, but if they don't at least get the count to 32 like freakin Killzone 2 and Homefront were able to pull off, then I'll be just a bit peeved at DICE. I mean, MAG had 256 players, easily 4x the players BF3 will have but DICE can't even handle 32? Give me a break.

SPYDER0416

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

I'm fine as long as its only a little smaller and they don't completely shrink the maps down, but if they don't at least get the count to 32 like freakin Killzone 2 and Homefront were able to pull off, then I'll be just a bit peeved at DICE. I mean, MAG had 256 players, easily 4x the players BF3 will have but DICE can't even handle 32? Give me a break.

mitu123

"bu..but..MAG!" :cry:lawlessx

I honestly crack up IRL when people bring this game up in these discussions...

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

I'm fine as long as its only a little smaller and they don't completely shrink the maps down, but if they don't at least get the count to 32 like freakin Killzone 2 and Homefront were able to pull off, then I'll be just a bit peeved at DICE. I mean, MAG had 256 players, easily 4x the players BF3 will have but DICE can't even handle 32? Give me a break.

lawlessx

LOL I have heard cows cry this whenever BF3 player limit comes out.

I don't think its fair to continually put down console users who want to buy the game. We need to chill with the graphics and 64 players bragging :?.

Upparoom

Yes and when consolites fight over who has better graphics in red dead, we all want to hear that:oops:

As long as it still has that great battlefield gameplay its all good.This and KZ3 are going to be my main MP shooters.

MAG didn't have the best effects or graphics, but I bring it up because I mean... it works and is relatively lag free while also maintaining large urban environments with vehicles and the like.

All I'm asking is 32 really. Killzone 2 had some amazing graphics and effects and offered 32, SOCOM: Confrontation (and SOCOM 4) offered 32 players, and Frontlines as well as Homefront have offered 32 players and yet DICE can't get it up even that high.

Honestly, its not a matter of hardware limitations when its 32 g****** players and every other game under the sun could pull it off.

Good thing I'm moving on to PC gaming soon.

[QUOTE="Sp4rtan_3"]BFBC2 had 24 players and the matches were epic so I dont see how its a problem with BF3.ferret-gamer

MAG didn't have the best effects or graphics, but I bring it up because I mean... it works and is relatively lag free while also maintaining large urban environments with vehicles and the like.

All I'm asking is 32 really. Killzone 2 had some amazing graphics and effects and offered 32, SOCOM: Confrontation (and SOCOM 4) offered 32 players, and Frontlines as well as Homefront have offered 32 players and yet DICE can't get it up even that high.

Honestly, its not a matter of hardware limitations when its 32 g****** players and every other game under the sun could pull it off.

SPYDER0416

that makes perfect sense to me, far less players and this is the way for a dev to approach developing for consoles and pc at the same time, dont try and skim things off to make the games the exact same on all platforms, if one platform is going to have more features then so be it

linkin_guy109

Considering how little ram consoles have, its not surprising.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

MAG didn't have the best effects or graphics, but I bring it up because I mean... it works and is relatively lag free while also maintaining large urban environments with vehicles and the like.

All I'm asking is 32 really. Killzone 2 had some amazing graphics and effects and offered 32, SOCOM: Confrontation (and SOCOM 4) offered 32 players, and Frontlines as well as Homefront have offered 32 players and yet DICE can't get it up even that high.

Honestly, its not a matter of hardware limitations when its 32 g****** players and every other game under the sun could pull it off.

mitu123

32 players shouldn't be hard, even with destruction and maintaining a higher resolution.

Honestly I'd be fine if they were willing to lower the graphics on MP for the sake of a higher player count. Rinbow Six: Vegas kept some great graphics in the campaign and lowered them online to keep matches running smoothly, and I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult for DICE to do the same.

Regardless, this is all just my hopes. If they can't raise the count even a little I will be disappointed with them a bit, but at least they were able to bring the experience to everyone with as few sacrifices as possible.

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

MAG didn't have the best effects or graphics, but I bring it up because I mean... it works and is relatively lag free while also maintaining large urban environments with vehicles and the like.

All I'm asking is 32 really. Killzone 2 had some amazing graphics and effects and offered 32, SOCOM: Confrontation (and SOCOM 4) offered 32 players, and Frontlines as well as Homefront have offered 32 players and yet DICE can't get it up even that high.

Honestly, its not a matter of hardware limitations when its 32 g****** players and every other game under the sun could pull it off.

SPYDER0416

32 players shouldn't be hard, even with destruction and maintaining a higher resolution.

Honestly I'd be fine if they were willing to lower the graphics on MP for the sake of a higher player count. Rinbow Six: Vegas kept some great graphics in the campaign and lowered them online to keep matches running smoothly, and I'm sure it wouldn't be too difficult for DICE to do the same.

Regardless, this is all just my hopes. If they can't raise the count even a little I will be disappointed with them a bit, but at least they were able to bring the experience to everyone with as few sacrifices as possible.

And then DICE said there were network limitations to do what I said above while maintaining the graphics, that's why 24 is chosen for every BF game on consoles.

Note that those games you listed don't do any of that so that don't have to suffer.

We can dream for 32 players though.:)

[QUOTE="Upparoom"]

I don't think its fair to continually put down console users who want to buy the game. We need to chill with the graphics and 64 players bragging :?.

Kinthalis

Because I'm sure the console fanboys on this forum will absolutley continue to chill about PC gaming and how we spend $10,000 every 10 seconds to keep our rigs updated, or how all we have are games no one cares about because there isn't someone on TV 24/7 telling us they are soo cool and we must buy them! or because the developers don't say thigns like "When you push this button AWESOME happens!", or how developers sell a billion more copies on consoles so PC gamers don't matter, or how we can't play games from our couch on our TV's.

Am I rite?

Well sure if you wana play that game how about those PC ego maniacs who think console gamers runied thier games and blame them for everything and not the devs themselvs.Oh and how some PC ego maniacssay your basicly an idiot for playing aconsole version and not the PC version.See I can do it too. Im not saying all PC gamers are like this though but there are some crazies out there.