Consoles supporting 32v32 in BF3

Why is it that most FPS on consoles only go to between 24-32 players at a time. I know in the pc version of the games they can go up to 64 or more players at a time. Why is that?

technical limitations the consoles just dont have enough power and memory to handle that many people running causing mayhem. They actually struggle just to maintain 24.

technical limitations the consoles just dont have enough power and memory to handle that many people running causing mayhem. They actually struggle just to maintain 24.

Gen007

[QUOTE="Gen007"]

technical limitations the consoles just dont have enough power and memory to handle that many people running causing mayhem. They actually struggle just to maintain 24.

HilbillyRokstar

They would have to dumb it down quite a bit on not only a graphically but technical level to get to MAGs level but you are right. It wouldn't be BF anymore imo though. People shouldn't worry about player counts any way. More players !=(does not equal) better game. The maps for BF3 have been modified for consoles and it works well. The maps are still huge and there's still plenty of people running around trying to shoot you. The PC version stuffs in more people but spread out over a larger area so it feels very much the same in the end.

Same thing with MAG 256 players but spread out over a large area with different objectives. It never feels like you fighting more than a few people at a time.

Also yes i have played both.

[QUOTE="Gen007"]

technical limitations the consoles just dont have enough power and memory to handle that many people running causing mayhem. They actually struggle just to maintain 24.

HilbillyRokstar

Consoles currently have the power to run 64v64 multiplayer matches if they really wanted to. But, like you said, other areas in the game would be required to suffer too much.

The mulitplayer experience on the XBOX 360 is good the way it is.

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"][QUOTE="Gen007"]

technical limitations the consoles just dont have enough power and memory to handle that many people running causing mayhem. They actually struggle just to maintain 24.

Blueresident87

Consoles currently have the power to run 64v64 multiplayer matches if they really wanted to. But, like you said, other areas in the game would be required to suffer too much.

The mulitplayer experience on the XBOX 360 is good the way it is.

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"]Depending on the game. They could produce something visually bland like MAG on the PS3 (which I actually kinda like, but it's no comparison to BF3) and make it work just fine.HilbillyRokstar

Consoles currently have the power to run 64v64 multiplayer matches if they really wanted to. But, like you said, other areas in the game would be required to suffer too much.

The mulitplayer experience on the XBOX 360 is good the way it is.

Where did I say that? If anything, I said a match of any size is possible just not realistic. And I was speaking about BF3 mostly; 64v64 could probably be made possible but the presentation would suck and it wouldn't be nearly as much fun.

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"][QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

Consoles currently have the power to run 64v64 multiplayer matches if they really wanted to. But, like you said, other areas in the game would be required to suffer too much.

The mulitplayer experience on the XBOX 360 is good the way it is.

Blueresident87

Where did I say that? If anything, I said a match of any size is possible just not realistic. And I was speaking about BF3 mostly; 64v64 could probably be made possible but the presentation would suck and it wouldn't be nearly as much fun.

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"]Sooo, MAG is an impossibility? 'Cause I'm pretty sure I played with about 250 other peeps in that game. Musta' been a dream. Hmmmm.HilbillyRokstar

Where did I say that? If anything, I said a match of any size is possible just not realistic. And I was speaking about BF3 mostly; 64v64 could probably be made possible but the presentation would suck and it wouldn't be nearly as much fun.

Looked like a fine statement to me :?

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"]

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

Where did I say that? If anything, I said a match of any size is possible just not realistic. And I was speaking about BF3 mostly; 64v64 could probably be made possible but the presentation would suck and it wouldn't be nearly as much fun.

mr_zombie60

Looked like a fine statement to me :?

fact.

dice said it their self.

It can have have 32vs 32 on console but to be able to do so will requiring them to lower the visuels, ect. There needs to be a balance of them both.

BUT also more players dosn't = better. and dosn't applie to every game. You wouldn't want 50 ppl running on a size of a normal cod map.

[QUOTE="mr_zombie60"]

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"]When you generalized saying "Consoles currently have the power to run . . . .64v64 . . .if they really wanted to" It was a bit of an overstatement, to say the least.

HilbillyRokstar

Looked like a fine statement to me :?

[QUOTE="mr_zombie60"]

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"]When you generalized saying "Consoles currently have the power to run . . . .64v64 . . .if they really wanted to" It was a bit of an overstatement, to say the least.

HilbillyRokstar

Looked like a fine statement to me :?

Not really, because I said I was speaking about BF3, not MAG. I don't care about MAG. Consoles could handle 64v64 in BF3 but it would look like crap and not be nearly as fun.

That was my point, seeing as how the thread title says 'Consoles supporting 32v32 in BF3.'

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"][QUOTE="mr_zombie60"]

Looked like a fine statement to me :?

Blueresident87

Not really, because I said I was speaking about BF3, not MAG. I don't care about MAG. Consoles could handle 64v64 in BF3 but it would look like crap and not be nearly as fun.

That was my point, seeing as how the thread title says 'Consoles supporting 32v32 in BF3.'

See, no mention of which games, and if you were talking about the Dice's Battlefield MP games, they thenselves stated that 16v16 was pushing the limit on consoles for their game. So you're wrong either way!

There are games that are 16 vs 16 on Xbox 360 like Homefront. I wish they would have tried that for BF3 instead of another game with 12 vs 12.

Even with MAG they have to segregate the maps so you never have more than 12 vs 12 in your immediate map. So MAG just uses gimmicks to make people think they are playing with tons of people. The upcoming DUST 514 for PS3 will do the same thing while trying to call itself an MMOFPS.

There are games that are 16 vs 16 on Xbox 360 like Homefront. I wish they would have tried that for BF3 instead of another game with 12 vs 12.

Even with MAG they have to segregate the maps so you never have more than 12 vs 12 in your immediate map. So MAG just uses gimmicks to make people think they are playing with tons of people. The upcoming DUST 514 for PS3 will do the same thing while trying to call itself an MMOFPS.

[QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

There are games that are 16 vs 16 on Xbox 360 like Homefront. I wish they would have tried that for BF3 instead of another game with 12 vs 12.

Even with MAG they have to segregate the maps so you never have more than 12 vs 12 in your immediate map. So MAG just uses gimmicks to make people think they are playing with tons of people. The upcoming DUST 514 for PS3 will do the same thing while trying to call itself an MMOFPS.

firefox59

well the map isnt actually segregated to be fair if you want you can travel from one end to the other but it wouldnt be very wise. You are better off sticking with your squad and trying to complete objectives in your area where you spawn. This is how the game keeps the action spread out. Usually there aren't to many people in a giving spot but it occasionally does get to those times when theres like 100 people just shooting at each other. When the happens the game just becomes a cluster **** and not much fun at all plus the framerate really takes a hit.

[QUOTE="firefox59"][QUOTE="KC_Hokie"]

There are games that are 16 vs 16 on Xbox 360 like Homefront. I wish they would have tried that for BF3 instead of another game with 12 vs 12.

Even with MAG they have to segregate the maps so you never have more than 12 vs 12 in your immediate map. So MAG just uses gimmicks to make people think they are playing with tons of people. The upcoming DUST 514 for PS3 will do the same thing while trying to call itself an MMOFPS.

Gen007

well the map isnt actually segregated to be fair if you want you can travel from one end to the other but it wouldnt be very wise. You are better off sticking with your squad and trying to complete objectives in your area where you spawn. This is how the game keeps the action spread out. Usually there aren't to many people in a giving spot but it occasionally does get to those times when theres like 100 people just shooting at each other. When the happens the game just becomes a cluster **** and not much fun at all plus the framerate really takes a hit.

[QUOTE="Gen007"]

[QUOTE="firefox59"] I didn't know that about MAG, that makes it even worse.HilbillyRokstar

well the map isnt actually segregated to be fair if you want you can travel from one end to the other but it wouldnt be very wise. You are better off sticking with your squad and trying to complete objectives in your area where you spawn. This is how the game keeps the action spread out. Usually there aren't to many people in a giving spot but it occasionally does get to those times when theres like 100 people just shooting at each other. When the happens the game just becomes a cluster **** and not much fun at all plus the framerate really takes a hit.

DICE could have made larger battles for the Xbox 360 version of BF3 versus PS3 version because of 2x main memory but they chose not to. Even if they only added four extra per team.

[QUOTE="HilbillyRokstar"]

[QUOTE="Gen007"]

well the map isnt actually segregated to be fair if you want you can travel from one end to the other but it wouldnt be very wise. You are better off sticking with your squad and trying to complete objectives in your area where you spawn. This is how the game keeps the action spread out. Usually there aren't to many people in a giving spot but it occasionally does get to those times when theres like 100 people just shooting at each other. When the happens the game just becomes a cluster **** and not much fun at all plus the framerate really takes a hit.

KC_Hokie

DICE could have made larger battles for the Xbox 360 version of BF3 versus PS3 version because of 2x main memory but they chose not to. Even if they only added four extra per team.