My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

[CDN-SMOKEJUMPER]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I want BF3 to be WW2 again. I want a Spitfire that flies like a Spitfire, the jets in game fly like a airscrew driven bird other than the strato climb on the F-35.

I want realistic damage as in I take a .303 and shoot you in the heart and you die but if its a nick in the ribs you don't etc.

I want Battleships and Aircraft Carriers with Corsairs on deck. I want the major players, US, Canada, UK, Germany, Russia, Japan, Australia and New Zealand for the LRDG involved. Hey some Gurkahs thrown in would be cool too!

I want a realistic WW2 FPS with all the latest graphics and a Crysis like engine.

I want the ultimate WW2 shooter with massive servers like 250 a side so we can have a real scrap. Each side having a squadron of fighters or bombers or both, a tank battalian and lots o infantry.

I want to be in WW2 without the real blood.

That's what I want for BF3.

[eddyeddyd]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

awsome

[scrat15]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

Thanks again, Colony, for explaining things on my behalf again.

Well it seems that most people agree on BF3 being larger scale and more in-depth, with generally more realism.

It seems that people have very differing opinions on the theme and setting.
All that would be left now would be to decide which time zone / theme would be most popular i.e. WW2 like Smokejumper says, or contemporary counter-narcotics like some other dudes mentioned (and which is pretty much the sort of thing my topic went for).

[Keiros]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I haven't read the topic so forgive me if this was already said:

for me, BF is much more about fun than realism. This doesn't mean that I'd not want some changes like no instant diving, no nade spam, no sniper instant shots etc., because they add nothing but a great amount of nade whores and sniping camping bitches. Claymore in my opinion are ok but they should always detonate at any time somebody passes in front of them, friend or enemy, and they should always do damage. I hate sniping claywhores that just camp in a narrow street with clays around and you have to nade frag them and wait for the guy to deploy his mines.

The kinda FPS game I'd like:

- futuristic weaponry like BF2142, maybe without silly things like launchpods (come on..);
- large maps created for vehicle based confrontation, with some cap point that need to be take by infantry (rooms, rooves...). These ones should have quiet a lot of fast or heavily armoured transport vehicles so as infantry can be taken where it's needed.
- smaller maps created for infrantry only game. They should be thougth to encourage team coordination, so they should allow for multiple attack routes and provide multiple strong defense points;
- the commander locked inside a trailer. Even immortal, if you wish, but please make the commander unable to fight.

[Oronare]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

Id like to see a GRAW type map, built up but massive with loads of transport.

[L3adcannon]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I`d like realism+ guerilla warfare so yes.

[LoganT]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I kind of want DICE to hire the Sir Mod developers. What a fun game. But things I would like from BF3:

Have an actual class called Jihader:

His object is to kill a tank or an APC (no infrantry) any which way he can. He gets points for sacrificing himself if he kills the enemy.

It should be hard for the tanks to move the cannon. Part of the problem with tanks is they can adjust the sensitivity to flip the cannon 360 very fast.

No weapon unlocks. Just give them to us.

All classes get grapple and zip line.

A vehicle should not explode when it runs by a claymore.

Engineer should only get 2 AT Mines

Grenades can explode in hand. Making for ALLAH AKBAR moments with the enemy.

Just a few ideas.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

So let me get this straight, you just made a concept work focusing on the jet aspect of it the most (take note, create a nerfed air concept and build a mod around it?).

Ill give you the credit for hard work but I dont like the idea nor the concept.

If anything, more appealing games will have more players and people will always be drawn to "better, newer, faster", rather than a localized theatre.

I do give you credit for bringing in a little more storyline, I believe you need to create a "good guy" and a "bad guy" and make the battle worth something for both of the factions so that people could feel the immersion and whatnot.

[camper.]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I prefer "bad guy vs bad guy", generally more fun.

[Keiros]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I'd be curious to see a BF game or a Mod with civilians; any time you blow up somebody that's not a soldier, your team loses some ticket. That'd be very realistic.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

Its all about the immersion, Camper. In my experience, the most enjoyable game experience comes from knowing what you represent and what youre fighting against, on a more of a subconscious level. It doesnt even have to be right.

Make a game of Americans against Communists and youve got a simple, yet effective picture of a "friend" and a "foe", a hero and a villain. Add gear that you would feel yourself using, would like to use and whatnot and youve got a great gaming experience. It has to be known, famous, hyped up (even over nothing). Take it as a toy for your inner child.

Ive already used this example. The first suggestion to a person who wants to buy an airsoft rifle is to imagine himself kicking in a door and making an entry, imagine what gun would he be holding once hes kicking the door down. This is what works here aswell. What weapon/vehicle/aircraft your general player would imagine himself to be using? Answer that question and youve got a mix that works.

Or you will have to work sh!thard to create a concept work and toys that would be appealing to the player.

Using these examples youll see where BF2 prevailed and where BF2142 failed.

One of the theories about POE2 failure is that it didnt have a clear foe and a clear hero. Germany versus Ukraine? While the gameplay is sh!tfun, its still a new game, and you forget about what side youre playing and whatnot, after youve gone through the process of immersion and getting used to the game.
Immersion is a powerful tool.

Working out a concept of a game has to include psychology of a gamer to make the best initial impression. A´la - "those commies invaded Europe, raped, pillaged and murdered millions and now we, Americans are there to stop them, yeah! Yippie ki yay motherf*cker!"

[camper.]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

I'd be curious to see a BF game or a Mod with civilians; any time you blow up somebody that's not a soldier, your team loses some ticket. That'd be very realistic.

And very illegal.

[Keiros]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

And very illegal.

Rly? in which country?

[camper.]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

Rly? in which country?

Pretty much everywhere. Games are generally not allowed to have kill-able civillians or children.

Not too sure about civillians, because HL1 and HL2 are full of them.

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: My design for a Battlefield 3. Would you move on from BF2 to this?

Camper, wasnt that about killing mothers (women?) and children?