I play Battlefield 3,cod black ops, mw2, mw3 on xbox 360 and I genuinely believe that tier 1 on consoles is the best mix of the cod and battlefield franchises as it is relentless and encompasses the best aspects of the two - battlefield 3 is a wasted oppertunity as the maps are simply to big for just 24 players and the COD games are just to samey year after year - roll on warfighter I say!
Why are the Console versions of BF3 so limited BattleStrats? Well, because the consoles have ~7 year old hardware in them. The consoles are already choking on what they have to process, 30FPS on a silent environment.
i agree with you when you said there should be at least 48 people on bf and if not at least 32. so that way we can have more bases more vehciels (i know i spelled it wrong) and more action to make it fun. even though it doesn have some funny moments when jets crash but we can have more. the gameplay should be like the trailers
@pegorino1000 Hahaha, PC takes skill. Console games don't, coz you have that little shit aim assist. And console games suck in general. FPS is crap on it. Especially battlefield xD
@slayer8244 stop acting like a horny 13 year old you little bitch i have bf3 on pc and console and on my ps3 it works like a fucking wet dream on pc it works fine too but that doesn't mean you should go out comparing the same game wtf are you gonna gain out of that i like all platforms and i don't insult them that they have this error or that error pc may be the lead platform but it also has it's errors and bugs it doesn't have infinity space it it too so fuck off
@slayer8244 DUDE grow up and shut the fuck up i had bf3 on pc and it was almost the same as the graphics on my ps3 i honestly don't see any difference just enjoy the game rather than embarrass your self you dumb troll
@MidgetmaniaRIP mag on the ps3 had 200 + players what makes you think a ps3 can't handle 32 the reason why dice didn't add 32 to ps3 is because ecks bawx three sixty was holding it back and dice wanted to balance the games fail troll is fail
@pegorino1000 If you knew anything about the specs of the Xbox 360 and PS3, you'd know that they can basically do everything that the other can do. There is no HUGE difference between them like there would be for console/PC.
The vintage remark of a retarded 12 year old is that the other person is a troll because they disagree.
Now, you are in fact the troll. The past 5+ comments you've posted are just insulting others for their opinion or for disagreeing.
@MidgetmaniaRIP i know all that specs shit on ps3's and xbox360's and pc's why do all pc gamers hate on consoles did they rape your ass or something complain all you want call me a 12 year old i know am not and they're differences between the ps3 and xbox360 actually there's tones they are not the same you're being a pc fanboy
Well most people choose console because they don't want pcp lag if they have slow computers, and when you play on the computer at a close distance, there is a possibility of you getting glasses, you can loose your vision easily and thats why people prefer a farther distance to game on.
I feel that the main issue with console having a watered down version is because console can't give the same experience that a high performance processor and graphics card could found in gaming computers. I do agree that less players is more fun, but too little is no fun. I find myself constantly(forgive me bf community) in call of duty black ops, it is most fun in crouch servers which I play when there are only 6-10 people and not the max or the minimum.
These console fags just do not understand that it is not viable to have 64 players on the consoles.They would have had to slim down the graphics visual effects the lot to get it get it to work not to mention the huge advantage a person would get hosting the game on console they need dedicated servers.
I clicked on it because I wanted to see bf3 footage not BC2, the title is somewhat of a troll. Pegorino u sound like an 11 year old rageface who get's bullied and put down by an older brother or a harmful street gang. you need to stop getting so mad about shit and chill the fuck out. It's the fucking internet. EVERYONE will say "my dick is bigger because I have it right here in front of me and I am too egotistical or stupid to imagine a better dick on someone else."
30FPS for xbox....increasing any units or vehicles will bring it below that to the point where you cant bear to play any longer. whenever the next gen consoles come out this might go away but not right now with the 360
wow retarded. look up the specs to consoles. they can't handle that with the amount of input in the game. they shrank the map sizes on console to adjust it and keep it on the edge of chaos I love the console port but consoles have to be held on a different level than PC.
64 players for me is not very fun. Battlefield 2 feels like an explosion fest at that amount. I can't even stay alive the first second I spawn. I just spam some nades and hope I get a kill.
Battlefield 3 is not bad on Xbox at all. Yes, people camp, and it gets kind of boring at times, but that happens in all FPS games. Also, if console were to have 64+ players, the matches would be a heck of a lot laggier than just 24 player matches.
dethrone COD...cod uses 16 Player games. so for that they still win. And even tho battlefield is the best shooter ever, it's still a personnal feeling. Cod will get played more still because it's fast pased,easy and boring...and people like it easy and boring so COD wins anyway. The thing us Battlefield players should do is just play more and give support to Dice! Maybe in 2013 with next gen consoles comming out we'll have 128 players battlefields.
Imagine bf3 playing 64 players on current gen consoles. The game already runs on 30FPS and lags when it gets too much action. imagine 5 jets,10 engeniers firing rockets and 10 tanks rolling all at once. Consoles are limited and the fact that battlefield is so polished prevents it from having lots of players.
@APCBaab32 wtf are you talking about i have the ps3 version of bf3 and when there's alot of action going on there NEVER i repeat NEVER a frame rate drop who ever told you that consoles have framerate drops in bf3 where did you hear that ?
bfbc 2 had more destruction and was easier to play. bf3 is just a really serious war game. you have to hold your breath when sniping and the guns have alot of recoil. no quadbikes either which kinda sucks too :(
Do you think that this is MW3? Do you want everything to be as crowded as hell? Think before you speak non-sense like this. BF3 is the best game, due to it's amazing graphics and uncrowded game play.
dude, stotp complaining its a AMAZING game it dont matter how meny plays u have in a team. Your the only one i have ever heard crying about how meany poeple are on a team. Every body LOVES the game.
@bingb0ng360 He's not crying, BF2 is still my absolute favorite mmofps, coinciding with what he said, chaos, a perfected balance between chaos and boredom.
There is only one game that the ps3 can handle and that is MAG aka Massive Action Game for ps3 is 32 vs 32,64 vs 64,and 128 vs 128. So please DICE make BF3 a great game for everyone :) I'm jealous because PC is 32 vs 32
I think the problem is in the consoles memory. In 32 player matches, BF3 uses about 900MB of RAM. In 64 player matches it uses about 1.6GB of RAM ALL by itself (as suggested by the Windows Task Manager) Also, BF3 on the console is capped to 30FPS for a reason, it won't go much faster and without Frame jumps.
I love BF3 but there is a fun factor missing that Bad Comp 2 had it was just a game u could never set down where i find myself putting BF3 down after an hour or 2, but BF3 is still a very good game and i would take it over any of the MODWF's
It's not a surprise, Console cannot handle 64 players, but maybe 32 or 42, I think it is fair for PC gamers, because we had to have Bullshit for the BC spin offs with limited players. Console had their time, now PC is the lead now.
dude shut the fuck up! you dont know shit...well look at the game now, its the number one game of the year, has the highest votes, the highest HD graphics, and the highest fun. so make sure you do your research first before you say something stupid like that. ;)
dice should make servers that serve the purpose of high player count(100 and up) and console players should petition as much as pc players do, during this process probably we will be charged but the true battlefield will again succeed as it did during bf2
I have no clue why this has so many dislikes. This is a pretty straightforward and reasonable arguement. I'm a PS3 player and I have no complaints, but I'd like a little more for the Xbox and PS3 when we are compared to the PC crowd.
i have bf3 on console and i think it's fine. i've never played pc so i can't say it's way better but i'm sure more players would be more fun. however this means there are more players to kill you. i don'y know but i play bf3 on console and it's just fine no matter what anyone says. let's stop the argument and play the game!
@secreto209 I have it on Ps3 does your game freeze alot? I have it on Pc aswell it's extremely better i'll have to say as alot more PC players know what to do instead of other teammates on Console just running past you when you need ammo or medic pack. There are a few annoying things with the console but i personally think the game should only be designed for PC its more exciting and alot of fun. Ps3 i don't get the fun because i have alot of TMs who don't help at all.
@2011MrDubstep i know what you mean. i don't get any real freezes but i do get the very rare lag (on xbox 360.) i find alot of people do help out though. i definatly would like to get it for pc though
close to good as bf3 is, no destructability, vehicles i mean dice has done so much already for cus console players!! fuck we all know that bf3 has so much innovation in it and nonetheless deserves to be praised as one of the greates agames of all time so please people shut up with the complaining..
heland no bf3 for consoles does not fail.. it is arguaby the best looking game for consoles yet.. and it plays and runs good.. thankfully they kept it at 24 because imagine if we had 32 which it would be mice to have but then the game would become laggier and take out from the experience.. yes the true experience we will never be able to play but thats totally obvious due to hardware limitations.. and yes even though other games have more players on servers.. remember theyre not even
@tenchis1106 It does abit mate, it shouldn't realistically be on console it's alot better on PC. Console players don't understand the game types they even play, PC players do also theres alot of PC players that don't rage over the mic or send you insultive messages.
lol i know a lot of pc players dont even like playing 64 player pc... they instead go to 32 player cus the battle is so much more condensed and fulfilling than having to travel so much in distance in 64 player maps..
@THEDJNOKAS Although MAG allows 200 players, its graphics are lower, therefore, the 200 players you see there, if you boost them up to the BF3 graphics will crash the PS3. I am not saying that a PS3 is inferior, but your argument is invalid.
It's pretty simple. The consoles only have 512 MB of RAM. The PC version requires at least 2 GB. Yes, there are some PS3 games supporting 64 or more players, but they have simplistic lighting, crude geometry, only the most basic physics, and non-interactive terrain. So DICE had a choice--either strip out most of the BF3 gameplay and basically port it to an primitive graphics engine, or cut down the number of players and the map size. Either way, console gamers would complain.
@MrSniperscope no its good on console, just because we dont have Ultra Settings and 60 Frames per second doesnt mean its bad. plus i know some pc players dont like having all 64 players on the map so they go to 32 players. It's still battlefield and it still looks and plays great. also we dont need to pay as much for a decent computer.
@MrSniperscope SORRY! But not EVERYONE is like you and they don't have the money to get a one million dollar PC witch your mum paid for. I'll stick to my £199.99 Xbox 360 thank you, why? Because my friends have an xbox too so it would be stupid if I got a PC just because it's "Better" Yeah it is better but not worth playing by my self, THAT'S why people have consoles, easy, user friendly and doesn't take your money.
one million dollars? bro you mad? XD i paid £700 for a laptop because i needed one for work. But i also found i had the right specs to play bf3. btw, do you really think im sad enough to pay £700 just for games?
@lutontown123 Haha, you claim the PC takes your money? yeah, so thats why you are playing on a xbox(pay for online xD) Tell me which takes your money now :) And btw: I built my IRL friend a brand new computer with parts from newegg.com(550 US dollars) that can play BF3 at high settings wih 50fps+
@MrSniperscope Have you ever thought that maybe some people may not be able to afford a GOOD gaming pc to run battlefield 3 at a steady framerate and there are even people out there who think pc's graphics are shit i mean really? open your eyes...
@MrSniperscope So what if BF3 was better on PC? Here in Indonesia, i prefer to buy it for PS3 because PC games are pirated. Don't even try to say that BF3 on PC is totally better than consoles. On consoles, you can enjoy BF3 on a very big TV screen, but for PC, despite better graphics, people can only enjoy that on a small screen of a Laptop or computer.
you also get more players on pc and more frames per second on pc...
but anyways, yea im actually kinda wrong. i played bf3 on ps3 and it isnt bad at all. graphics look pretty good too. but i did think it should of got 32 players. ea kinda screwed you guys over :P
@MrSniperscope Yeahh, in response, BF3 on consoles and PC has their own pros and cons. Oh ya, one more thing...BF3 on consoles have less chance of getting lag than PC,lol! :P
@CJdesertHunter555 oh yeah i don't know why pc say ps3 and xbox360 has framerate drops all this time i'v been playing bf games on consoles and pc my pc has a good video card but i have never experienced any lag on my ps3 but had lag on my pc
@CJdesertHunter555 Is your IQ below 10 or something? Are you really that stupid? "PC can only enjoy small screen" WTF? You know that a PC can be hooked to _ANY_ screen. It can actually be hooked up to more screens than what the PS3 can. Hey, I can even run _5_ 50" inch TVs on my PC at ONCE! We can even use screens that have VGA,DVI,HDMI outputs.
@iqtuz Whoa! Another insult from the internet! Look at my age,bro! I'm in fact is still 14 and I haven't know any such of those things. What a disrespectful person you are to call somebody stupid. okay okay, 50' inch? How about 120" inch?! Is that possible yet? I'm not stupid okay? I haven't learn about computing before you make that comment, because i'm still learning it at school.
@pegorino1000 Every PC which has a gfx card from atleast 2006 will be able to hook up to any screen which uses the standard connectors(VGA,DVI,HDMI,display port) That includes lik 99% of gfx cards and 99% of the TVs. So, I'm sorry for you, but your IQ is -10. Retard.
@pegorino1000 Thats because you probably got a low-end 1 dollar intergrated intel gfx chip. A potato works better than those cheap fuckers. Like, a pencil got more processing power than that.
@iqtuz dude you just can't know which pc a person has and just say shit about it wtf is wrong with you pc fanbitches all you do is just brag on how great pc is well let me tell ya something dumbass piece of shit nobody gives a fuck
I hate people like you... using a tracer dart on an infantry map! So frustrating picking up a kit like that and switching to secondary and thinking WTF!!!! nooooes.
And considering MAG on Ps3 handles 200 players, the arguement that it won't work on Xbox really doesn't make sense, especially with dedicated servers. If it was P2P they would definitely have more of an arguement, but it's not, it's dedi servers.
@thecucumberification MAG looked worse than lego with 0 physics. Yes, the console can run 64 player battlefield if you let the game look like counter strike 1.6 With the current gfx, no chance.
What I would REALLY like to see, is the option to play 24, 32, 42, and 64 player games. An example would be you're tired of playing 24 player games, so you could jump into the same game mode, same map, but with 64 players. Some people might not like 64 players, that's why they should give you the option. I know it would be hard to do, but it seems Dice cares about their consumers a little more than CoD does, and if they did come through with that, it would be huge.
I agree with what I've watched so far, which is 6 minutes. I started playing the Battlefield series on Bfbc2, so I'm not a Battlefield 'veteran', but I will agree that more than 24 players would be nice, in SOME instances. Usually in any objective game, you have itleast 4 people doing something else, aside from going for the objective. Be that sniping, using mortars and what not, so it only boils down to about 5-8 people on each side going for the objective.
@hellraiser5671 The reason the Xbox360 and PS3 can't have 64 player matches in BF3, is because the hardware in them isn't sufficient enough to handle that much. The RAM in them is especially limited, on top of that, their networking/online is also limited. It's simple mathematics, it just can't be done on consoles.
@Mrgigagooga Warhawk is a much older game, and made for older hardware. BF3 was built on new technology, for the latest of graphics hardware, that's why it had to be limited for consoles. If anything, it should show you the reason why consoles cost $200. They're outdated by an entire generation, and then some. Why do you think Sony is making PS3.5?
@Mrgigagooga Man, you console gamers don't know anything about how computer hardware works. No wonder you game on consoles.
I guess if you want the developers to make games with older technology, outdated graphics/physics and no next-generation features, you could all write a letter or something.
What I don't understand is, you console gamers debate whether the Xbox360 or PS3 has the better graphics, yet you all say you don't care about graphics.
@RalphCQ Man, you pc gamers don't know anything about gameplay on consoles. You always think the graphics suck and are like on BF2. YOU ARE ALL WRONG! Play it for a while on console and you'll find out it's not worse than on pc, and when you get into it, you don't actually give a shit about 24 player online
@Mrgigagooga also FYI, that IS computer hardware in your console. Consoles have always had computer hardware inside of em, but the 360 and PS3 are way more like an actual PC than any console has ever been. Which is the problem with them.
Oh shut the FUCK UP. THE VAST MAJORITY of consumers prefer console games. MOST people prefer to spend $400 every 6 years on a new console, than the ridiculous amount of money needed to play the latest PC game.
CRYSIS' developer was FORCED to go to consoles because of the LOW profit on PCs in comparison.
The REASON this console generation lasted so long is because, MOST game developers couldn't keep up to build expensive graphics (first couple years)
@itsokayright The MAJORITY are idiots. Why do u care, if us PC users spend more? We are educated, have good jobs, and can afford it.
Also, your argument about why Crysis was put on consoles is bullshit. Crysis and Crysis Warhead (which consoles don't have, probably won't get) sold MILLIONS of copies on PC, that's not even including digital sales.
Also, there's an external CPU/RAM upgrade coming for PS3, and also a more powerful version of the X360. Why do you suppose that is?
Because Consoles are just not up to snuff... BF on a console is just stupid if you ask me. I play games on PC and console, and I've played BF extensively on PC. I've tried it a couple times on the console and its quite honestly a JOKE. Just get a PC! They are getting cheaper and cheaper to make every day
32 would be nice, because if you play conquest you are always gonna loose 2 players to the damn jets so you instant only have 10 hoes running around with a m4 and that sexy ass RPG. haha damn sure would be nice to have a couple extra crack heads running around :(
ey you guys, in the First game informer that talke about BF3 with it as the cover page Beach from EA says "The PC audiance has been the one complaining" And thats the Reason why they are getting 64 and consoles 24. We all Know the PS3/Xbox wont handle BF3 with 64....but we can get 42 0r 32 at least...this isnt about consoles vs PC, its about getting you moneys worth, any dumbass that says conlose cant handle 42 or 32 players is a fanboy cuz the PS3 has MAG over 200 players in 1 game. Thumbs up
@THEDJNOKAS I understand why you are upset, but to have more players on BF3 for the consoles is not possible because the CPU can't handle it. To handle
This has been flagged as spam show
I play Battlefield 3,cod black ops, mw2, mw3 on xbox 360 and I genuinely believe that tier 1 on consoles is the best mix of the cod and battlefield franchises as it is relentless and encompasses the best aspects of the two - battlefield 3 is a wasted oppertunity as the maps are simply to big for just 24 players and the COD games are just to samey year after year - roll on warfighter I say!
slaxxxer 3 days ago
Why are the Console versions of BF3 so limited BattleStrats? Well, because the consoles have ~7 year old hardware in them. The consoles are already choking on what they have to process, 30FPS on a silent environment.
ysflightman 6 days ago
on consoles
XxsilentpersonxX11 3 weeks ago
i agree with you when you said there should be at least 48 people on bf and if not at least 32. so that way we can have more bases more vehciels (i know i spelled it wrong) and more action to make it fun. even though it doesn have some funny moments when jets crash but we can have more. the gameplay should be like the trailers
XxsilentpersonxX11 3 weeks ago
GTFO CONSOLE NOOBS
slayer8244 3 weeks ago
@slayer8244 gtfo pc noobs
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
@pegorino1000 Hahaha, PC takes skill. Console games don't, coz you have that little shit aim assist. And console games suck in general. FPS is crap on it. Especially battlefield xD
slayer8244 3 weeks ago
@slayer8244 stop acting like a horny 13 year old you little bitch i have bf3 on pc and console and on my ps3 it works like a fucking wet dream on pc it works fine too but that doesn't mean you should go out comparing the same game wtf are you gonna gain out of that i like all platforms and i don't insult them that they have this error or that error pc may be the lead platform but it also has it's errors and bugs it doesn't have infinity space it it too so fuck off
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
@pegorino1000 Oh btw, Battlefield was born, built, and designed for the PC. SO GTFO
slayer8244 3 weeks ago
@slayer8244 i know bf started on pc but now it's on console and pc and you can't do shit about it so fuck off you little parasite
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
@pegorino1000 battlefield is meant for PC, its shitty on the consoles.
slayer8244 3 weeks ago
@slayer8244 its still worth having
Greenhelm64 3 weeks ago
@slayer8244 DUDE grow up and shut the fuck up i had bf3 on pc and it was almost the same as the graphics on my ps3 i honestly don't see any difference just enjoy the game rather than embarrass your self you dumb troll
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
@slayer8244 /watch?v=meTtDIUUv1g
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
good vid, man this vid got me thinking, and now im p*ssed!! lol i want more players for console.............THIS IS MY COMPLAINT :D
TRUEW4RR10R 4 weeks ago
man people are dumb.
RalphCQ 4 weeks ago in playlist fails
i do think that bf3 on xbox and ps3 could do more people like 40vs40 or 32vs32.
102GLEN 1 month ago
@102GLEN No FUCKING WAY that a current or next-gen console could have a fucking 40vs40 game.
MidgetmaniaRIP 1 month ago
@MidgetmaniaRIP mag on the ps3 had 200 + players what makes you think a ps3 can't handle 32 the reason why dice didn't add 32 to ps3 is because ecks bawx three sixty was holding it back and dice wanted to balance the games fail troll is fail
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
@pegorino1000 If you knew anything about the specs of the Xbox 360 and PS3, you'd know that they can basically do everything that the other can do. There is no HUGE difference between them like there would be for console/PC.
The vintage remark of a retarded 12 year old is that the other person is a troll because they disagree.
Now, you are in fact the troll. The past 5+ comments you've posted are just insulting others for their opinion or for disagreeing.
STFU, troll.
MidgetmaniaRIP 4 weeks ago
@MidgetmaniaRIP i know all that specs shit on ps3's and xbox360's and pc's why do all pc gamers hate on consoles did they rape your ass or something complain all you want call me a 12 year old i know am not and they're differences between the ps3 and xbox360 actually there's tones they are not the same you're being a pc fanboy
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
Well most people choose console because they don't want pcp lag if they have slow computers, and when you play on the computer at a close distance, there is a possibility of you getting glasses, you can loose your vision easily and thats why people prefer a farther distance to game on.
Zorok999 1 month ago
stfu you idiot :L
TheWafertastic 1 month ago
you sound gay
DarkestNight87 1 month ago
I feel that the main issue with console having a watered down version is because console can't give the same experience that a high performance processor and graphics card could found in gaming computers. I do agree that less players is more fun, but too little is no fun. I find myself constantly(forgive me bf community) in call of duty black ops, it is most fun in crouch servers which I play when there are only 6-10 people and not the max or the minimum.
UltimateGamingExperi 1 month ago
These console fags just do not understand that it is not viable to have 64 players on the consoles.They would have had to slim down the graphics visual effects the lot to get it get it to work not to mention the huge advantage a person would get hosting the game on console they need dedicated servers.
nash3timemvp 1 month ago
@nash3timemvp dude stfu
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
The developers of Frontlines were originally working for Dice on one of their earlier titles.... Till they got shafted by Dice that is.
smokinaj40000 1 month ago
wtf this is BC2
CaptainSplat23 1 month ago 5
@CaptainSplat23 it's battlefield bad company 2 dumbass
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
@pegorino1000
I clicked on it because I wanted to see bf3 footage not BC2, the title is somewhat of a troll. Pegorino u sound like an 11 year old rageface who get's bullied and put down by an older brother or a harmful street gang. you need to stop getting so mad about shit and chill the fuck out. It's the fucking internet. EVERYONE will say "my dick is bigger because I have it right here in front of me and I am too egotistical or stupid to imagine a better dick on someone else."
CaptainSplat23 3 weeks ago
if i wanted to hear a guy being raped i would be at your house raping you now
Bezpuddle 1 month ago
30FPS for xbox....increasing any units or vehicles will bring it below that to the point where you cant bear to play any longer. whenever the next gen consoles come out this might go away but not right now with the 360
NateHedstrom 1 month ago
How retarded is this guy? He is practically criticizing Battlefield 3 for what is really the shortcomings of his own platform.
CarlMinez 1 month ago
and all massive online games were pretty crappy on console
shoelessjoeh 1 month ago
@shoelessjoeh thats not true free realms runs on ps3 just fine
XxReTROk1DxX 1 month ago
wow retarded. look up the specs to consoles. they can't handle that with the amount of input in the game. they shrank the map sizes on console to adjust it and keep it on the edge of chaos I love the console port but consoles have to be held on a different level than PC.
shoelessjoeh 1 month ago
omg, you're thereddragon????
PAXperMortem 1 month ago
Its nott that fun whit 64 players. Its to mutch. Around 40 is fun.
cmstom 1 month ago
and it is a fun game faggot
TheBlobzor 2 months ago
by the way..... your quality is shit
TheBlobzor 2 months ago
shut up noob
tocexy4you123 2 months ago
shut up please
TheSonofaragorn 2 months ago
@bmanickel yes he is
bingb0ng360 2 months ago
be happy that you can play anything at all you stupid fuck
drakkenkrull 2 months ago
i rather have 24 players den have 64 players and not as many wepaons
Akpak96 2 months ago
64 players for me is not very fun. Battlefield 2 feels like an explosion fest at that amount. I can't even stay alive the first second I spawn. I just spam some nades and hope I get a kill.
Blackthorne2010 2 months ago
i have a solution, it might sound crazy but....
Buy a pc.
thebast4 2 months ago
Why are u playing battlefield on console if ur a veteran?
MasterPiPoNL 2 months ago
Battlefield 3 is not bad on Xbox at all. Yes, people camp, and it gets kind of boring at times, but that happens in all FPS games. Also, if console were to have 64+ players, the matches would be a heck of a lot laggier than just 24 player matches.
AFrailOldLady 2 months ago
This is why I have a PC.
NTHorn1227 2 months ago
@NTHorn1227 this is why i have a pc ps3 and xbox360 and not giving SHIT WHICH PLATFORM I PLAY ON!!!!! DICKHEAD!!
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
the only thing that makes superior pc is keyboard and mouse. i dont care if i play on low low low with 30 fps. :P
xTott123 2 months ago
@xTott123 honestly 60fps and 30fps i have a ps3 version and i don't see the difference
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
You mean BF3 did right by the PC?
boombox129 2 months ago
dethrone COD...cod uses 16 Player games. so for that they still win. And even tho battlefield is the best shooter ever, it's still a personnal feeling. Cod will get played more still because it's fast pased,easy and boring...and people like it easy and boring so COD wins anyway. The thing us Battlefield players should do is just play more and give support to Dice! Maybe in 2013 with next gen consoles comming out we'll have 128 players battlefields.
APCBaab32 2 months ago
Imagine bf3 playing 64 players on current gen consoles. The game already runs on 30FPS and lags when it gets too much action. imagine 5 jets,10 engeniers firing rockets and 10 tanks rolling all at once. Consoles are limited and the fact that battlefield is so polished prevents it from having lots of players.
APCBaab32 2 months ago 11
@APCBaab32 check resistance 2 on ps3. its laglish with 40 vs 40 explosions happening every where and gun tagging and everything
karooo53 1 month ago
@APCBaab32 i cant believe you lag on bf3. it takes forever for mine to lag
Ale6ander579 1 month ago
@APCBaab32 wtf are you talking about i have the ps3 version of bf3 and when there's alot of action going on there NEVER i repeat NEVER a frame rate drop who ever told you that consoles have framerate drops in bf3 where did you hear that ?
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
@APCBaab32 or imagine every current vehicle in a map filled, with mobile aa, and then have tons of guys on the ground
jonwesleyc 4 weeks ago
@APCBaab32 You obviously havent noticed how strong the PS3 actually is...
StUpIdxSaDiStIc 2 weeks ago
@StUpIdxSaDiStIc Not nearly as powerful as you think, son.
jsDX11 2 weeks ago
@jsDX11 i agree. ps3 is a little bit more powerful than Xbox because we really weren't given any attention.
chewy9597 5 days ago
I would really love to see 64 player maps on console, it was awesome on BF 1942 and BF2
EverydayBullshit 2 months ago
True, 24 players on console BF3 is a joke. If one team has 5 players that decide to camp with snipers, the game gets shit boring. No action.
Ozolz 2 months ago
it didnt failed me so i dont care xD
MadKiller231 2 months ago
Idgaf what anyone sys ima enjoy games with my xbox 360 on my big tv pc has an small screen and graphics..... So? Id rather play big that small Lmfao.
Dungeonboytellem 2 months ago
For some reason this game is just boring now, doesn't really have that addictive feel that bfbc2 had
jsDX11 2 months ago
@jsDX11
bfbc 2 had more destruction and was easier to play. bf3 is just a really serious war game. you have to hold your breath when sniping and the guns have alot of recoil. no quadbikes either which kinda sucks too :(
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@jsDX11 yeah it reminds me of medal of honor.i'm tempted to try out homefront.
TheHumanpopsicle 2 months ago
@jsDX11 oh yeah i literally played bfbc2 every day almost every morning i'd wake up and start playing i literally ranked up everyday
'
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
i m3an this IS bfbc2
factorman92 2 months ago
this i bfbc2
factorman92 2 months ago
BF2 was the same way, besides, BF3 is AMAZING on the console, lets all chill.
apnudi 2 months ago
Do you think that this is MW3? Do you want everything to be as crowded as hell? Think before you speak non-sense like this. BF3 is the best game, due to it's amazing graphics and uncrowded game play.
TheGeo279 2 months ago
bf3 is actually pretty bad for console imo. i got it on boxing day, because everyone was saying the graphics were amazing and everything was perfect.
the graphics are terrible, and the gameplay is less than fluid. the only thing that ive seen better, is that theres no lag.
SimcoeBruthas 2 months ago
players*
bingb0ng360 2 months ago
dude, stotp complaining its a AMAZING game it dont matter how meny plays u have in a team. Your the only one i have ever heard crying about how meany poeple are on a team. Every body LOVES the game.
bingb0ng360 2 months ago 14
@bingb0ng360 He's not crying, BF2 is still my absolute favorite mmofps, coinciding with what he said, chaos, a perfected balance between chaos and boredom.
bmanickel 2 months ago
@bingb0ng360 its really add more fun w more pplz
math2844 1 month ago
@bingb0ng360 Not me.
KaiDraegon 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There is only one game that the ps3 can handle and that is MAG aka Massive Action Game for ps3 is 32 vs 32,64 vs 64,and 128 vs 128. So please DICE make BF3 a great game for everyone :) I'm jealous because PC is 32 vs 32
james65508 2 months ago
I think the problem is in the consoles memory. In 32 player matches, BF3 uses about 900MB of RAM. In 64 player matches it uses about 1.6GB of RAM ALL by itself (as suggested by the Windows Task Manager) Also, BF3 on the console is capped to 30FPS for a reason, it won't go much faster and without Frame jumps.
newgenerationisbg 2 months ago
Battlefield veterans shouldn't be playing on consoles anyway.
Fortune2point0 2 months ago
I don't think it's shit on consoles. It's good but it's inferior to the PC version every way possible.
40nVIRGIN 2 months ago
-3 the shirt bro
xXhumanninjaXx 2 months ago
I love BF3 but there is a fun factor missing that Bad Comp 2 had it was just a game u could never set down where i find myself putting BF3 down after an hour or 2, but BF3 is still a very good game and i would take it over any of the MODWF's
jgreco2412 2 months ago
October:
Me Talking about how I wanted a good PC and I hate macs mostly because bf3 is only on windows
Christmas:
Gets Mac
My face -_-
MrCognee 2 months ago
It's not a surprise, Console cannot handle 64 players, but maybe 32 or 42, I think it is fair for PC gamers, because we had to have Bullshit for the BC spin offs with limited players. Console had their time, now PC is the lead now.
TheCommunistAvenger 2 months ago
dude shut the fuck up! you dont know shit...well look at the game now, its the number one game of the year, has the highest votes, the highest HD graphics, and the highest fun. so make sure you do your research first before you say something stupid like that. ;)
archythegreat7 2 months ago
Uh... MAG does not run on Frostbite 2.
SalaD891 2 months ago
Man you 250 bucks for your console. Don't expect it to be as powerful as a 1000 bucks gaming pc...
MrTheMrhappy 2 months ago
dice should make servers that serve the purpose of high player count(100 and up) and console players should petition as much as pc players do, during this process probably we will be charged but the true battlefield will again succeed as it did during bf2
larryable1 2 months ago
I have no clue why this has so many dislikes. This is a pretty straightforward and reasonable arguement. I'm a PS3 player and I have no complaints, but I'd like a little more for the Xbox and PS3 when we are compared to the PC crowd.
Yennziuu 2 months ago
that is not battlefield 3 that is damn bad company 2
Jacob5689 2 months ago
@Jacob5689 look at the date this video was uploaded you dumb shit. BF3 wasn't even released.
TheShyfire 2 months ago
@Jacob5689 Well, duh? Look at the upload date. Battlefield 3 wasn't realeased yet. Plus, did you even listen to this guy? -.-'
FinnishGaming 2 months ago
that is not battlefield 3 that is damn bad company 2
Jacob5689 2 months ago
The author is an idiot! This is a fucking BK2 footage! Not BF3 one! Consoles suck btw.
vadimyakus 2 months ago
we need mods dam it. bf2 was so succifull becouse of it like project realality and new weapons, vechicals, and maps so on
Starr8492DS 2 months ago
Fail 07:55
MrLaughingbaby 2 months ago
Comment removed
MrLaughingbaby 2 months ago
CAN U STFU???
OF COURSE U CAN!
apple97100 2 months ago
STFU!
apple97100 2 months ago
PS3 and Xbox360 cant handle BF3, on the Higher normal PC settings it lags them both to death.
A1234567890J1 2 months ago
i have bf3 on console and i think it's fine. i've never played pc so i can't say it's way better but i'm sure more players would be more fun. however this means there are more players to kill you. i don'y know but i play bf3 on console and it's just fine no matter what anyone says. let's stop the argument and play the game!
secreto209 2 months ago
@secreto209 I have it on Ps3 does your game freeze alot? I have it on Pc aswell it's extremely better i'll have to say as alot more PC players know what to do instead of other teammates on Console just running past you when you need ammo or medic pack. There are a few annoying things with the console but i personally think the game should only be designed for PC its more exciting and alot of fun. Ps3 i don't get the fun because i have alot of TMs who don't help at all.
2011MrDubstep 2 months ago
@2011MrDubstep i know what you mean. i don't get any real freezes but i do get the very rare lag (on xbox 360.) i find alot of people do help out though. i definatly would like to get it for pc though
secreto209 2 months ago
@secreto209 Dunno whats up with my Ps3 then it's only this game it does it with. :/ I haven't lagged for a while.
2011MrDubstep 2 months ago
close to good as bf3 is, no destructability, vehicles i mean dice has done so much already for cus console players!! fuck we all know that bf3 has so much innovation in it and nonetheless deserves to be praised as one of the greates agames of all time so please people shut up with the complaining..
tenchis1106 2 months ago
heland no bf3 for consoles does not fail.. it is arguaby the best looking game for consoles yet.. and it plays and runs good.. thankfully they kept it at 24 because imagine if we had 32 which it would be mice to have but then the game would become laggier and take out from the experience.. yes the true experience we will never be able to play but thats totally obvious due to hardware limitations.. and yes even though other games have more players on servers.. remember theyre not even
tenchis1106 2 months ago
@tenchis1106 It does abit mate, it shouldn't realistically be on console it's alot better on PC. Console players don't understand the game types they even play, PC players do also theres alot of PC players that don't rage over the mic or send you insultive messages.
2011MrDubstep 2 months ago
lol i know a lot of pc players dont even like playing 64 player pc... they instead go to 32 player cus the battle is so much more condensed and fulfilling than having to travel so much in distance in 64 player maps..
tenchis1106 2 months ago
@THEDJNOKAS Although MAG allows 200 players, its graphics are lower, therefore, the 200 players you see there, if you boost them up to the BF3 graphics will crash the PS3. I am not saying that a PS3 is inferior, but your argument is invalid.
TheTheoryOfNoobility 2 months ago
battlefield 3 became too much like cod. battlefield always had a very arcade like feel. not so much anymore.
Banje33 2 months ago
Everyone who says that consoles are good enough for 32 players don't get that they don't have dedicated servers.
XenophonWombat 2 months ago
It's pretty simple. The consoles only have 512 MB of RAM. The PC version requires at least 2 GB. Yes, there are some PS3 games supporting 64 or more players, but they have simplistic lighting, crude geometry, only the most basic physics, and non-interactive terrain. So DICE had a choice--either strip out most of the BF3 gameplay and basically port it to an primitive graphics engine, or cut down the number of players and the map size. Either way, console gamers would complain.
fearsomepirate 2 months ago
BF3 IS SHIT ON CONSOLE!!! get it for pc!
MrSniperscope 2 months ago 18
@MrSniperscope Not everyone can afford a 1000$ PC to handle BF3, why do people not understand that?
steps3344 2 months ago
@steps3344
i know that...im just just saying.
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope no its good on console, just because we dont have Ultra Settings and 60 Frames per second doesnt mean its bad. plus i know some pc players dont like having all 64 players on the map so they go to 32 players. It's still battlefield and it still looks and plays great. also we dont need to pay as much for a decent computer.
jubcow 2 months ago
@jubcow
i sol bf3 on console and got mw3 instead. bf3 is so much better on pc.
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope BF3 on console iis still ALOT better than MW3...
OMGtehEPICNESSS 2 months ago
@OMGtehEPICNESSS
no its not... its terrible on console. mw3 i think is better than the console version of bf3
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope SORRY! But not EVERYONE is like you and they don't have the money to get a one million dollar PC witch your mum paid for. I'll stick to my £199.99 Xbox 360 thank you, why? Because my friends have an xbox too so it would be stupid if I got a PC just because it's "Better" Yeah it is better but not worth playing by my self, THAT'S why people have consoles, easy, user friendly and doesn't take your money.
lutontown123 2 months ago
Comment removed
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@lutontown123
one million dollars? bro you mad? XD i paid £700 for a laptop because i needed one for work. But i also found i had the right specs to play bf3. btw, do you really think im sad enough to pay £700 just for games?
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@lutontown123 Haha, you claim the PC takes your money? yeah, so thats why you are playing on a xbox(pay for online xD) Tell me which takes your money now :) And btw: I built my IRL friend a brand new computer with parts from newegg.com(550 US dollars) that can play BF3 at high settings wih 50fps+
iqtuz 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope Have you ever thought that maybe some people may not be able to afford a GOOD gaming pc to run battlefield 3 at a steady framerate and there are even people out there who think pc's graphics are shit i mean really? open your eyes...
thumpingable 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope bf3 is good on console.
Shotcalm 2 months ago
@Shotcalm
i know
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope So what if BF3 was better on PC? Here in Indonesia, i prefer to buy it for PS3 because PC games are pirated. Don't even try to say that BF3 on PC is totally better than consoles. On consoles, you can enjoy BF3 on a very big TV screen, but for PC, despite better graphics, people can only enjoy that on a small screen of a Laptop or computer.
CJdesertHunter555 2 months ago
@CJdesertHunter555
you also get more players on pc and more frames per second on pc...
but anyways, yea im actually kinda wrong. i played bf3 on ps3 and it isnt bad at all. graphics look pretty good too. but i did think it should of got 32 players. ea kinda screwed you guys over :P
MrSniperscope 2 months ago
@MrSniperscope Yeahh, in response, BF3 on consoles and PC has their own pros and cons. Oh ya, one more thing...BF3 on consoles have less chance of getting lag than PC,lol! :P
CJdesertHunter555 2 months ago
@CJdesertHunter555 oh yeah i don't know why pc say ps3 and xbox360 has framerate drops all this time i'v been playing bf games on consoles and pc my pc has a good video card but i have never experienced any lag on my ps3 but had lag on my pc
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
@CJdesertHunter555 Is your IQ below 10 or something? Are you really that stupid? "PC can only enjoy small screen" WTF? You know that a PC can be hooked to _ANY_ screen. It can actually be hooked up to more screens than what the PS3 can. Hey, I can even run _5_ 50" inch TVs on my PC at ONCE! We can even use screens that have VGA,DVI,HDMI outputs.
iqtuz 2 months ago
@iqtuz Whoa! Another insult from the internet! Look at my age,bro! I'm in fact is still 14 and I haven't know any such of those things. What a disrespectful person you are to call somebody stupid. okay okay, 50' inch? How about 120" inch?! Is that possible yet? I'm not stupid okay? I haven't learn about computing before you make that comment, because i'm still learning it at school.
CJdesertHunter555 2 months ago
@CJdesertHunter555 Pro tip: Don't open your mouth if you don't know more than a potato : )
iqtuz 2 months ago
@iqtuz not all pc's can be hooked to a big screen dumb ass you sir are the one with a below 10 IQ
pegorino1000 4 weeks ago
@pegorino1000 Every PC which has a gfx card from atleast 2006 will be able to hook up to any screen which uses the standard connectors(VGA,DVI,HDMI,display port) That includes lik 99% of gfx cards and 99% of the TVs. So, I'm sorry for you, but your IQ is -10. Retard.
iqtuz 4 weeks ago
@iqtuz my pc a dell 2009 model can't be connected to a tv screen not all pc's can do that pc fanbitch
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
@pegorino1000 Thats because you probably got a low-end 1 dollar intergrated intel gfx chip. A potato works better than those cheap fuckers. Like, a pencil got more processing power than that.
iqtuz 3 weeks ago
@iqtuz dude you just can't know which pc a person has and just say shit about it wtf is wrong with you pc fanbitches all you do is just brag on how great pc is well let me tell ya something dumbass piece of shit nobody gives a fuck
pegorino1000 3 weeks ago
1682 people wasted their money on slow gameplay with 24 players :P mw3 is best on console, but bf3 pwns pc
CarterFitzzy 2 months ago
bf3 conquest maps are too big for the number of players in the maps.
DoobSac 2 months ago
Your ignoring that consoles are not as powerful as today's pc'c. you are arguing for something that could not of been done!?!
muppetmaster23 3 months ago
I hate people like you... using a tracer dart on an infantry map! So frustrating picking up a kit like that and switching to secondary and thinking WTF!!!! nooooes.
sunil237 3 months ago
And considering MAG on Ps3 handles 200 players, the arguement that it won't work on Xbox really doesn't make sense, especially with dedicated servers. If it was P2P they would definitely have more of an arguement, but it's not, it's dedi servers.
thecucumberification 3 months ago
@thecucumberification MAG looked worse than lego with 0 physics. Yes, the console can run 64 player battlefield if you let the game look like counter strike 1.6 With the current gfx, no chance.
iqtuz 3 months ago
What I would REALLY like to see, is the option to play 24, 32, 42, and 64 player games. An example would be you're tired of playing 24 player games, so you could jump into the same game mode, same map, but with 64 players. Some people might not like 64 players, that's why they should give you the option. I know it would be hard to do, but it seems Dice cares about their consumers a little more than CoD does, and if they did come through with that, it would be huge.
thecucumberification 3 months ago
I agree with what I've watched so far, which is 6 minutes. I started playing the Battlefield series on Bfbc2, so I'm not a Battlefield 'veteran', but I will agree that more than 24 players would be nice, in SOME instances. Usually in any objective game, you have itleast 4 people doing something else, aside from going for the objective. Be that sniping, using mortars and what not, so it only boils down to about 5-8 people on each side going for the objective.
thecucumberification 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
BF3 24 PLAYER SUCKS!!! FUCKING WASTE OF MY MONEY!!!
humanghaffari 3 months ago
Cool t-shirt xD
RoyeTheRipper 3 months ago
I am confident xbox can handle 64 players on bf3 aswell as ps3
hellraiser5671 3 months ago
@hellraiser5671 The reason the Xbox360 and PS3 can't have 64 player matches in BF3, is because the hardware in them isn't sufficient enough to handle that much. The RAM in them is especially limited, on top of that, their networking/online is also limited. It's simple mathematics, it just can't be done on consoles.
RalphCQ 3 months ago
@RalphCQ watch from 6:55 on! there's some simple mathematics for you :D
Mrgigagooga 2 months ago
Comment removed
RalphCQ 2 months ago
@Mrgigagooga Warhawk is a much older game, and made for older hardware. BF3 was built on new technology, for the latest of graphics hardware, that's why it had to be limited for consoles. If anything, it should show you the reason why consoles cost $200. They're outdated by an entire generation, and then some. Why do you think Sony is making PS3.5?
RalphCQ 2 months ago
@RalphCQ just keep in mind that warhawk was "latest" on -07.
Same situation is now with BF3, only few years later.
After all, i guess, it's not much up to consoles hardware, it's more up to servers and connections from every aspect.
Mrgigagooga 2 months ago
@Mrgigagooga Man, you console gamers don't know anything about how computer hardware works. No wonder you game on consoles.
I guess if you want the developers to make games with older technology, outdated graphics/physics and no next-generation features, you could all write a letter or something.
What I don't understand is, you console gamers debate whether the Xbox360 or PS3 has the better graphics, yet you all say you don't care about graphics.
So confusing.
RalphCQ 2 months ago
@RalphCQ Man, you pc gamers don't know anything about gameplay on consoles. You always think the graphics suck and are like on BF2. YOU ARE ALL WRONG! Play it for a while on console and you'll find out it's not worse than on pc, and when you get into it, you don't actually give a shit about 24 player online
Mrgigagooga 2 months ago
@Mrgigagooga My last consoles were PS2 and Xbox (and Gamecube), I do have a Wii tho.
Nintendo's always made CONSOLE games, PS3 and 360 are wannabe PC's that are over a generation old now.
RalphCQ 2 months ago
@Mrgigagooga also FYI, that IS computer hardware in your console. Consoles have always had computer hardware inside of em, but the 360 and PS3 are way more like an actual PC than any console has ever been. Which is the problem with them.
RalphCQ 2 months ago
@RalphCQ
Oh shut the FUCK UP. THE VAST MAJORITY of consumers prefer console games. MOST people prefer to spend $400 every 6 years on a new console, than the ridiculous amount of money needed to play the latest PC game.
CRYSIS' developer was FORCED to go to consoles because of the LOW profit on PCs in comparison.
The REASON this console generation lasted so long is because, MOST game developers couldn't keep up to build expensive graphics (first couple years)
itsokayright 2 months ago
@itsokayright The MAJORITY are idiots. Why do u care, if us PC users spend more? We are educated, have good jobs, and can afford it.
Also, your argument about why Crysis was put on consoles is bullshit. Crysis and Crysis Warhead (which consoles don't have, probably won't get) sold MILLIONS of copies on PC, that's not even including digital sales.
Also, there's an external CPU/RAM upgrade coming for PS3, and also a more powerful version of the X360. Why do you suppose that is?
RalphCQ 2 months ago
Because Consoles are just not up to snuff... BF on a console is just stupid if you ask me. I play games on PC and console, and I've played BF extensively on PC. I've tried it a couple times on the console and its quite honestly a JOKE. Just get a PC! They are getting cheaper and cheaper to make every day
Radioswim 3 months ago
32 would be nice, because if you play conquest you are always gonna loose 2 players to the damn jets so you instant only have 10 hoes running around with a m4 and that sexy ass RPG. haha damn sure would be nice to have a couple extra crack heads running around :(
TheAircolby 3 months ago
ey you guys, in the First game informer that talke about BF3 with it as the cover page Beach from EA says "The PC audiance has been the one complaining" And thats the Reason why they are getting 64 and consoles 24. We all Know the PS3/Xbox wont handle BF3 with 64....but we can get 42 0r 32 at least...this isnt about consoles vs PC, its about getting you moneys worth, any dumbass that says conlose cant handle 42 or 32 players is a fanboy cuz the PS3 has MAG over 200 players in 1 game. Thumbs up
THEDJNOKAS 3 months ago 30
@THEDJNOKAS I understand why you are upset, but to have more players on BF3 for the consoles is not possible because the CPU can't handle it. To handle