Other General Battlefield 3 discussion thread

Worth mentioning that I have read your in game soldier name is probably going to be your EA master ID. As far as I can see from other posts online you will not be able to have multiple IDs like BF2 and BFBC2. So anyone who has got a stupid name for their EA id e.g I_AM_AN_IDIOT.... thats going to be your ingame ID.

I originally had CMDR_Zod but with a chat call to EA I manged to get it changed. They will only change it once for you so be sure what you want !

 

I think what he means (and I agree), is that it is much easier to update a wesbsite and make the changes live than it is to create a patch and then put that onto the origin servers and wait for users to download it. Additionally changes to a website could be made on a much finer level; where a developer, if there is a single minor issue, might wait to patch until there are many, they may well just make the changes to the website immediately.

EDIT: Its also less annoying for the user, all the changes are made dev side, the user never has to download patches regarding the server browser.

 

Greetings!

Steam auto-patch works fine, why doesnt Origin just duplicate it?
Inventing the wheel for a "rounder than circle" shape?

 

Either you are missing the point or you are being deliberately obtuse. The point isn't that "downloading is easy" the point is that all the steps before are faster and easier for the dev and downloading is negated entirely.

Please read my post again above as I feel that you didn't really the first time...

EDIT:There's also the edit I made above which I may well have ninja'd without you seeing.

 

it's not about auto-patch. it's about finer changes or fixes can be done quicker on a website.

 

As the site is HTML based, surely this can still be implemented into the game menu like CSS is ?

 

Greetings!

Regarding the server browser, and only the server browser. How many server browser patches are there during a games life?

If you are seeing whatever page in your browser, you have downloaded that information.

 

Isn't that being a bit too pedantic? Even if you do call it a "download" it is much more efficient than auto-patching as you don't have to download the patch to your system, you don't have to install it, and the changes are made instantaneously from one time you access the site to the next.

The only possible issue I can foresee with this is that it could cause the server browser to become unstable or inaccessible during update periods.

 

What I was going to say but in a far more relaxed manner...

When websites are updated isn't the coding done offline and then the changes are applied instantaneously to the site? You don't normally get downtime when a site is updated do you? So as long as the coding done is solid there won't be an "update period", it'll just change. At least that is the impression I get of web design these days.

 

Greetings!

Dont think so. It was the most direct way to write it.

Again, a server browser update happens seldom during a games lifetime. Saying that a server browser based browser advantage is easier to update is just weird.
An update of only an ingame server browser using a Steam-like update system would probably take the same time.

 

What time? No time? Because that will be the difference between loading a website and a server browser. The server browser still has to download the server information.

I would actually say the website would be faster to get the servers, think how slow it is for games to populate a list of servers, the website will populate the list for you and just dump the information at you immediately.

BC2 received one or two updates IIRC, because, to put it mildly, the browser was rather bad at launch.

We'll also likely see many more minor improvements that wouldn't be possible if a patch were necessary, just because in the past there have been few updates doesn't mean there could be minor improvements made.

Last post here on this topic, I believe I have laid all the points out...

 

Greetings!

Same as the server browser based browser.

List of my favourites TF2 servers refresh in under a second.

To compare to the speed of the server browser based browser of BF3 one needs to wait for the game to be actually out and with all the servers online, the alpha test had very few servers available of course it would look fast.

 

I'm not taking sides here but Impar you seem to be missing the point.

With the web browser option any changes made to the server browser system is made at DICE's/EA's end and all you do is open your browser window and your there, this means that lots of smaller incremental updates to the server browser system can be made can be made more frequently rather than waiting to fix a bunch of issues and release a single patch.

I'm not saying i'm a fan of this web browser system, it worked in the alpha but i would prefer to open BF3 and browse servers in the game (maybe im old fashioned! )

Going by the previous battlefield track record, there will be a few issues at launch and if this browser system means they can get minimise downtime then i'm all for it!

Who think's there will be a last minute patch on release day?!!

Let's get back to talking about how great BF3 will be!!

 

List of weapons in BF3

 

Greetings!

Lets see how many of those smaller incremental updates arent just to correct the server browser based browser and wouldnt be needed at all if using a classical in-game server browser. Would preferr if they used that developing time correcting proper bugs.

Ok...

 

I am excited about the 60MM Mortar i have always wanted that weapon in a FPS game . Im surprised nobody else has mentioned it, i havn't heard anything about it appart from it being in the weopons list, i hope its for MP.

 

Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory had a mortar.

 

You have no basis or reference to make this statement, it's just blind negativity.

So just because EA/DICE are using a new server browser system, you think a) they'll screw it up worse than the normal server browser system and b) they are wasting time that would be better spent on the game?

No matter what the server browser system is.... if the fails and no one can get into a server then everyone will be pissed. The server browser is integral to the game working and i'm sure they are aware of that.

So to wrap this up, unless there is no issue what so ever with the browser system, you will complain. That's the only thing that is obvious from your posts.

End of rant.

 

about the server browser issue, please don't complain when you don't know how it will work once it ships. This is how we move on as a medium, we have to try something new and it might as well be DICE. Do not complain about little things like this before the game ships, if it turns out to be an advantage for either player or developer we will have a new great way of doing things, if not then we will return to our old ways. a good example of this is MW2 servers, they worked like crap and thus they have returned to dedicated servers for the next games.

Do give criticism for anything that doesn't work once you have some experience with it, but do not complain about small changes as these are the once that drives us as a medium.

really the only things I really would complain about would be things that went against the very basis of the series. no vehicles, no 64 player maps or if it had been announced as "BF3 Cooking SIM"

 

DAO-12, AN94, LAV-AD, A-10's, AH-6J Littlebirds... I'm delirious with glee over those

Fifty something days to get my PhD wrapped up so I can sink a week into BF3 once it's out... best get these fingers tapping...