Prone

[BrokenMachine]

Re: Prone

Mag is different engine and different game. Destruction is really heavy on resources and bandwith. And there are bandwith limits on consoles dice cant break.
Bandwith increases exponentionally with each player. So for now its not possible for consoles. But they can make it for pc and they will do it because PC crowd is different and most pc players wouldnt buy simple port from consoles. Online FPS on pc needs Dedicated servers and clan support otherwise it will fail. Its not about discriminating console players. They are not punishing your or something they are giving you as much as they can. BFBC2 will be great on both platforms but for pc they have to add some specific features.

P.S. Upgrading pc hardware is not THAT expensive. If you build good pc(not from ripoff companies like dell hp etc) you can upgrade it easily.

I understand why PC's can have more players and bigger maps, etc thats not what I'm going on about. I did build my own PC so I know how expensive it is to build a good gaming machine. The point is with a console you can pay an outright fee and then play games on it for the next 5 - 10 years on it (lifespan of a console). Can you do that with a PC? not really.

Anyway this isn't about PC vs Console. We've had 2 games on consoles where the mics don't work. You would think after the first one they would think "OH YEAH LETS FIX THE MIC PROBLEM". Instead they released another game with the same problem and then tried to blame Sony. Yeah great lets make some money and blame someone else for us not fixing the mic problem. Then all we get is Gordon Van Dyke saying "Oh yeah we've got egg on our faces from the mic problems in 2 games". Well if you bothered to test 1943 on the PS3 it would have been quite apparent straight away that the comms dont work or very rarely do for a short time. Come on DICE were not idiots!

Anyway back on topic. They tell us basically its a Hardware problem for consoles because of no prone but considering the damage has been improved upon in 1943 and BC2 yet the player count hasn't been affected I fail to see the "Hardware Problem". If it were a choice between more damage than BC or increasing the player count then I would have said player count. Instead on consoles we keep the low player count and don't have the ability to prone and we get excuses like "oh you can't see them due to resolution of the game on consoles". But funnily enough there are games on consoles that do have prone and keep the actions fast e.g. COD and MAG (I'm sure there are plenty others). So stop with the B******t excuses please!

[johnrondot]

Re: Prone

yeah doesn't really concern me either since i won't ever be playing the console version.

i guess it explains the decision a bit though. but even in COD MW where you can prone, the games seems to have a fast pace.

perhaps prone should only be given for weapons that have bipods.

thats because cod has tiny boxed in maps

[PCGamer121.]

Re: Prone

Well , i have the answer i was looking for .

No prone for BC-2 ON ANY PLATFORM

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-bad-company-2/845056-no-prone-any-system.html#post11786740

[Minmaster]

Re: Prone

huh what about snipers then? i use prone a lot when i'm playing as sniper... it's going to be a weird change for sure.

at least it means there's no more prone dive spamming.

[PCGamer121.]

Re: Prone

There is going to be no prone plus they are keeping the killcam everybody has been asking to be removed.

All aboard the fail boat

[jesus]

Re: Prone

Its my bad I didn't see the link in the earlier post to the interview.

So basically because the console has 12 a side player limit they have removed prone. I find it hard to believe that the console versions of battlefield can't have more than 12 players a side becuase of hardware limitations. Just look at MAG. I've been quite happily playing 256 player and 128 player games with no lag. Granted there isn't any destructable environments but thats a massive difference in player count. Its hardly a Battlefield with 12 players a side is it really?

This quote is just plain stupid. " If you wanted a more powerful game, you should have bought a more powerful platform, plain and simple."

A lot of people can't afford to have top of the range gaming PC's or consoles. I have a PS3 and a PC but I stopped upgrading my PC an bought a PS3 purely for the fact that it was too expensive to keep upgrading my PC all the time. I'm sure they're not complaining that more people are buying games like mirrors edge on consoles than on PC.

It seems like they're just making excuses for making a lesser game for consoles when they already said they wanted to make their console game like their PC games with little or no differences. There are plenty of other console FPS that have prone as someone mentioned before without it affecting the speed of the gameplay. So saying that its a hardware limitation seems like another lame excuse.

We already pay a premium for console games compared to prices of PC games and I'm sure they aren't complaining about all the extra money they get from console sales. So is it unreasonable that we should expect their console version to be like the PC versions of games when its DICE themselves who are raising the expectations of console players only to dissapoint. I'm still doubtful that the mic problem will be fixed for BC2.

DICE, apparently, want to make a powerful game. They can't do that if they're going to make the consoles and the PC version identical. If they make it a PC game first, then the console port will be extremely limited compared to the PC version. If they make it a console game first, then the PC port will be extremely limited compared to other PC games. Both of these are due to the fact that you can do much more with PC hardware. Consoles are the "lowest common denominator"

Making a separate game for PC and consoles is the only way to keep both sides happy, and this includes DICE since, like I said, they seem to want to make a very powerful, big game.

On the topic of prone:

Prone does promote camping, and if there's only 12 people on each team and you've got 3 - 5 people wanting to be snipers and they're all camping, then your team is at a big loss. Unlike in a game like BF2 (and hopefully BC2), with 32 people on each team, 3 - 5 people camping won't make much of a difference.

That being said, the sniper class promotes camping more than prone does, so if they want to eliminate camping, they need to eliminate the sniper class.

[imported_JayZ]

Re: Prone

Prone does promote camping, and if there's only 12 people on each team and you've got 3 - 5 people wanting to be snipers and they're all camping, then your team is at a big loss. Unlike in a game like BF2 (and hopefully BC2), with 32 people on each team, 3 - 5 people camping won't make much of a difference.

You have an interesting point. Being an advocate for prone that logic didn't cross my mind.

Although it's probable that the PC will have 16 players, maybe even more. So it could still work.

[Minmaster]

Re: Prone

they think prone slows the game down, but in COD MW, it has prone and it doesn't terribly slow things down.

and why must BF be a fast paced game? sandbox war fps doesn't have to be fast paced, unless they want this game to supplant COD MW.

[jesus]

Re: Prone

they think prone slows the game down, but in COD MW, it has prone and it doesn't terribly slow things down.

and why must BF be a fast paced game? sandbox war fps doesn't have to be fast paced, unless they want this game to supplant COD MW.

But the maps in CoD4 can fit into the palm of your hand. BC2 is supposed to have big maps. Just because prone worked in a small game like CoD4, doesn't mean it would work in a big game like BC2 (unless it had higher player limits).

I don't really have a preference between prone or not. I've gotten used to not using prone in games like TF2 and UT3. But I like using it when sniping in BF2. I also like using it as a close-quarters tactic in CoD4 (insta-prone to confuse the enemy). I could easily carry on without it, though.

You have an interesting point. Being an advocate for prone that logic didn't cross my mind.

Although it's probable that the PC will have 16 players, maybe even more. So it could still work.

16, maybe. I'm thinking more around 24vs24 would be enough to have a few camping snipers on each team.

[Rambo]

Re: Prone

they think prone slows the game down, but in COD MW, it has prone and it doesn't terribly slow things down.

and why must BF be a fast paced game? sandbox war fps doesn't have to be fast paced, unless they want this game to supplant COD MW.

bf has never been fast paced in my mind!If i want a arena type game i will turn to quake:dead:

I have never been interested in COD for this very fact of no freedom

Also now tanks have see thru wall hacks and destroy buildings ,what is the poor infantry to do without prone stand and take it?

[BrokenMachine]

Re: Prone

bf has never been fast paced in my mind!If i want a arena type game i will turn to quake:dead:

I have never been interested in COD for this very fact of no freedom

Also now tanks have see thru wall hacks and destroy buildings ,what is the poor infantry to do without prone stand and take it?

I think Rambo is right. This game isn't COD or Halo or whatever and it shouldn't try to be. Part of the problem is that they are trying to appeal to console gamers by making it more fast paced and arcade. But because of this we lost things like prone and keep a small player count. I think if DICE made the game their own instead of trying to be like other games then they would stand a better chance of making headway into the console market.

Instead we get a buggy game on release thats never fixed properly and we get all the COD and other multiplayer gamers saying how buggy and bad the game is. So they don't really make any difference in their market share on consoles because they don't test their games properly and it puts a lot of people off.

I think its obvious that having the player count so low spoils the game. I'm not saying the games have to be massive just that 12v12 isn't really what Battlefield is about. Its called Battlefield FFS!!! How is it a Battlefield with 12 players on each team?! Also because of this low player count we have lost the ability to prone while other areas of the game like vehicles are getting more enhancements making more difficult to play as infantry.

I doubt we will see any major changes such as an increase in player count before BFBC2 comes out but if we get the same problems as before like the comms problem then I'll have to think about whether I'll make another DICE purchase again as it seems to be the same old story every time they release a game.

[RangerXML]

Re: Prone

I remember in Star Wars Battlefront they still had prone for console, was a blast to play. Then in Star Wars Battlefront 2 they removed it, didn't realize it until I took the high ground and tried to prone and got sniped because I was exposed.

[Kylee!]

Re: Prone

If you guys ever got off your computers and tried playing BC1 for a few moments you would know that the game works perfectly fine with no prone. After five minutes you don't even realize it.

The only thing I have a beef with about that is the LMGs and snipers you have to shoot standing up, which is pretty meh.

[Rambo]

Re: Prone

I think Rambo is right. This game isn't COD or Halo or whatever and it shouldn't try to be. Part of the problem is that they are trying to appeal to console gamers by making it more fast paced and arcade. But because of this we lost things like prone and keep a small player count. I think if DICE made the game their own instead of trying to be like other games then they would stand a better chance of making headway into the console market.

Instead we get a buggy game on release thats never fixed properly and we get all the COD and other multiplayer gamers saying how buggy and bad the game is. So they don't really make any difference in their market share on consoles because they don't test their games properly and it puts a lot of people off.

I think its obvious that having the player count so low spoils the game. I'm not saying the games have to be massive just that 12v12 isn't really what Battlefield is about. Its called Battlefield FFS!!! How is it a Battlefield with 12 players on each team?! Also because of this low player count we have lost the ability to prone while other areas of the game like vehicles are getting more enhancements making more difficult to play as infantry.

I doubt we will see any major changes such as an increase in player count before BFBC2 comes out but if we get the same problems as before like the comms problem then I'll have to think about whether I'll make another DICE purchase again as it seems to be the same old story every time they release a game.

over ripping the battlefield name a bit these days me thinks,damn you consoles

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Prone

They are simply ditching the "scout sniper" approach and going for the whole "designated marksman" route, which is fine by me. Their logic and reasoning is sound and the changes are there with gameplays interests in mind. If there was an SDK released, it wouldnt bother anyone.