Recommended Posts

I understand completely why EA thinks they need Origin... But I mean come on...

The people who bought the game and invest so much time into it only to be punished because the Origin servers are down is kind of silly.

Oh well, guess i'll have to go outside or something. :|

Back when steam had issues it would get better with time, this origin stuff is only getting worse with no light at the end of the tunnel at all.

Just gotta give them time, and hope they can work everything out... Its not like we really have a choice in the matter anyways,

  • Like 1

Back when steam had issues it would get better with time, this origin stuff is only getting worse with no light at the end of the tunnel at all.

It took YEARS before Steam was even stable enough to not crash every 10 minutes. They had MASSIVE issues with bandwidth, software stability, they dispatched ludicrously sized patches everytime they had to alter a game installation and at one point it was more common to get Steam errors/bugs/network issues than it was to actually have it working.

My god the revisionist history is strong with this one. What is Valve using here, a reality distortion field?

It took YEARS before Steam was even stable enough to not crash every 10 minutes. They had MASSIVE issues with bandwidth, software stability, they dispatched ludicrously sized patches everytime they had to alter a game installation and at one point it was more common to get Steam errors/bugs/network issues than it was to actually have it working.

My god the revisionist history is strong with this one. What is Valve using here, a reality distortion field?

I do remember this. I still hate Steam to this day. Was annoying having to go through it just to run CS:S. It may be a decent service now, but I can still live without it and get my PC games from GamersGate, who always have awesome deals.

The karkand assignments are god awful. Whoever thought those up needs to be fired. Forced to play squad death match to unlock a gun? Are you kidding? Who plays that? To add to that, the Famas has the worst iron sights I've ever seen in a video game before. 95% of your fov is obscured when using them. Bad bad bad.

  • Like 1

2500 points for the G35. One gun down. Also, it came with a 12x scope?! An automatic coming with that upon unlock. I barely managed to scope people mid range when i realized what i was using.

For some reason all guns are unlocking with the 12x scope, but it goes away once you change it.

Hopped on Karkand before literally for 10 minutes if that, just wanted to pop on real quick before I had dinner with my wife. Was really crazy how the destruction makes it such a different map than what I remember it to be from BF2. Also the whole coloring seemed odd, but it does match the new Frostbite 2 engine. Going to hop on now for about an hour and see if I cannot find a server that is rotating all of the new maps.

Here is why I personally do not believe in the unfair advantage of higher ranked players...

BF3_23-2.jpg

As you can see, I am only a Rank 8. I have not played the game in about 2 weeks.

Most of the people I played with our obviously really high ranks, not even sure what the term is nowadays in BF, Generals maybe? :laugh:

There is even another Rank 8 on the opposite team in 3rd place.

So yeah, although sometimes one does encounter overpowered players, I do think you can make up for it and overcome.

  • Like 2

The new patch seems to have fixed a lot things, however it hasn't fixed the TDM spawning, at least in the matches I played earlier. I got spawn killed at least 3 times per match. Other than that, it seems alright. Am really loving the new maps and weapons from Back to Karkand :)

Hopefully DICE will be fixing the TDM spawning further soon

TDM is no fun anymore, after the patch.

Now you should thank them that the spawn kills are reduced to like less than 5 per match.

Crashing like crazy now, can't play for more than 15min.

I am doing good on TDM, usually get around 3:1 KDR. On 64 player Conquest I just get smashed, I prefer servers with about 20 players. Got a few kills in the jets. I like the F2000 gun, just want some more unlocks with it. Much easier to play once you level up a bit.

Crashing like crazy now, can't play for more than 15min.

I am doing good on TDM, usually get around 3:1 KDR. On 64 player Conquest I just get smashed, I prefer servers with about 20 players. Got a few kills in the jets. I like the F2000 gun, just want some more unlocks with it. Much easier to play once you level up a bit.

F2000 FTW

Here is why I personally do not believe in the unfair advantage of higher ranked players...

<screenshot snipped>

As you can see, I am only a Rank 8. I have not played the game in about 2 weeks.

Most of the people I played with our obviously really high ranks, not even sure what the term is nowadays in BF, Generals maybe? :laugh:

There is even another Rank 8 on the opposite team in 3rd place.

So yeah, although sometimes one does encounter overpowered players, I do think you can make up for it and overcome.

Surely your screenshot proves the exact opposite, although I wouldn't call it an unfair advantage? Excluding the R8 player, every person in the top 5 on both teams has a "general" rank! Regardless, I don't think anyone here is claiming that high rank is a cause of high scores (logically it's the opposite), but it is indicative of how much time people have spent on the game, and their resulting skill within the game itself. If you look at it from the perspective of someone like me, who hasn't played an online shooter other than TF2 in about 4 years, and then take on a server loaded like that, you're pretty much ****ing in the wind if you want to maintain your stats. In fairness I don't much care about my stats I just like the game, but for some it could be off-putting.

I started up my LE of BF3 this morning before work. It asked if I wanted to download an update. It's kind of big so I started it, but it was going to slow. So I stopped it since I'm going to work. But looking at the info it says that update is needed to play the expansion. After I download that will it say there is another download available?

I started up my LE of BF3 this morning before work. It asked if I wanted to download an update. It's kind of big so I started it, but it was going to slow. So I stopped it since I'm going to work. But looking at the info it says that update is needed to play the expansion. After I download that will it say there is another download available?

The last update was a big one 4.2 GB or 3.9 for consoles.

Surely your screenshot proves the exact opposite, although I wouldn't call it an unfair advantage? Excluding the R8 player, every person in the top 5 on both teams has a "general" rank! Regardless, I don't think anyone here is claiming that high rank is a cause of high scores (logically it's the opposite), but it is indicative of how much time people have spent on the game, and their resulting skill within the game itself. If you look at it from the perspective of someone like me, who hasn't played an online shooter other than TF2 in about 4 years, and then take on a server loaded like that, you're pretty much ****ing in the wind if you want to maintain your stats. In fairness I don't much care about my stats I just like the game, but for some it could be off-putting.

I think you were focusing on what position I wound up in instead of my K/D. Meaning how exactly am I, or anyone else for that matter, ****ing in the wind with a 23-2 round? Obviously I am not the top player in the round, but I held my own, and that was my point. I was not even close to being dominated as people claim happens because they are lower ranks and do not have any weapons unlocked, and I just do not believe that to really be the case. It happens here and there, but nowhere near as bad as a problem as some in this thread would have you believe it is. If it was as bad as some people make it out to be in this thread, I would have been last place and 2-23. Again, that was my point.

People seem to be saying they cannot hold their own against higher ranked players because they have higher ranks and better weapons, etc., and I think 90% of the time that is just people just not putting in the time needed into the game to become good. This is not a game you can just hop into and expect to be good at. I also probably could have had a much higher round in points, but after capturing one flag I really for once just decided to go after kills.

So I really think it is time more than anything else that makes a person be able to hold their own at this game, and lucky for me the core gameplay has not changed much since BF1942, so I personally have a whole, whole lot of time put into the series. I am here to say people can enjoy the game and be a lower rank, and to get it out of their minds that the players they are facing are overpowered and have an unfair advantage. That is BS as far as I am concerned, and people are setting themself up for a bad experience without even having the experience yet. If you go into a round thinking you do not stand a chance, then you pretty much are already defeated.

So sure, it shows people who are generals and put in the time are going to more likely than not be towards the top of the scoreboard everytime, but it also shows even if you are not one of those people you can hang with them, and most importantly have fun and enjoy the game, and for those that care still have decent stats.

  • Like 2

OMG I love these maps.

So far, I have played on Strike at Karkand and Sharqi Peninsula and I am blown away by these two.

After playing them, I feel I won't be able to go back to the original ones. They are SOOOOOOOOOOO much better.

Looking forward to the hyped Wake Island and Gulf of Oman (Y)

I think you were focusing on what position I wound up in instead of my K/D. Meaning how exactly am I, or anyone else for that matter, ****ing in the wind with a 23-2 round? Obviously I am not the top player in the round, but I held my own, and that was my point. I was not even close to being dominated as people claim happens because they are lower ranks and do not have any weapons unlocked, and I just do not believe that to really be the case. It happens here and there, but nowhere near as bad as a problem as some in this thread would have you believe it is. If it was as bad as some people make it out to be in this thread, I would have been last place and 2-23. Again, that was my point.

People seem to be saying they cannot hold their own against higher ranked players because they have higher ranks and better weapons, etc., and I think 90% of the time that is just people just not putting in the time needed into the game to become good. This is not a game you can just hop into and expect to be good at. I also probably could have had a much higher round in points, but after capturing one flag I really for once just decided to go after kills.

So I really think it is time more than anything else that makes a person be able to hold their own at this game, and lucky for me the core gameplay has not changed much since BF1942, so I personally have a whole, whole lot of time put into the series. I am here to say people can enjoy the game and be a lower rank, and to get it out of their minds that the players they are facing are overpowered and have an unfair advantage. That is BS as far as I am concerned, and people are setting themself up for a bad experience without even having the experience yet. If you go into a round thinking you do not stand a chance, then you pretty much are already defeated.

So sure, it shows people who are generals and put in the time are going to more likely than not be towards the top of the scoreboard everytime, but it also shows even if you are not one of those people you can hang with them, and most importantly have fun and enjoy the game, and for those that care still have decent stats.

I agree with you. It's not about rank and unlocks. Even the lowest ranked player gets a rifle and that is what most of everyones kills are made by. I don't have a high rank but I often come within the top 3 of a game. I wouldn't say that is luck or due to my unlocks. It's that I have a fast reaction time and notice other players from the opposite team moving around while someone else might not notice it, I also use the in-game map that shows player positions all the time I have that thing blown up to max size. In this game if you don't respond to a threat fast enough the other guy is going to take you out.

Here is why I personally do not believe in the unfair advantage of higher ranked players...

But on the other side of things, I played a game two nights ago where I was the only player greater than rank 10 on my team against a team who had eagles in their insignias. Not sure what rank that is, but they kick our ass. The damnest part was the game never bothered to randomize the teams.

But on the other side of things, I played a game two nights ago where I was the only player greater than rank 10 on my team against a team who had eagles in their insignias. Not sure what rank that is, but they kick our ass. The damnest part was the game never bothered to randomize the teams.

It is because they have spent time in the game. They have come to know the map better than you guys

Wow, the expansion pack is pure awesome! I'm not much of a gamer, but it definitively brought back memories of the BF2 days.

Did the patch fix something to prevent people from spawn camping? I had a ton of people try to do that to me and I was able to blow them away before taking any damage. If so, thank god.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • This machine could very well be a second gaming PC for their living room as a console experience. So we would have to assume their main PC exists as well; With that said, I have 10gb home network with a 2.5gigabit internet connection here so we tend to have more than enough speed to download games. However, we can't make use of the 10gb LAN using Steam's built in transfer tool because it always compresses transfers and that slows the transfer down to well below a standard gigabit port speeds, sometimes as slow as 200-300Mb/s transfers. While that's probably still faster than most internet connections anyway, if they'd fix the LAN transfer issue it'd be upto x5 faster even on a gigabit LAN, than simply dropping a 2.5gbe port on there with hopes of a few people having fast internet connections. There are solutions, work arounds, like using LANCache if you run a NAS... or simply copying the files over manually using a network share.
    • Samsung announces ultra-fast UFS 5.0 storage to supercharge mobile AI by Paul Hill Local AI models tend to run a lot more slowly than cloud services like Claude and Gemini; however, Samsung has just announced that it has developed its UFS 5.0 solution, which increases data transfer to speeds of 10.8GB/s, enabling faster storage and processing in mobile memory that has the potential to provide more optimal local AI experiences. Commenting on this development, Jangseok Choi, head of Memory Product Planning at Samsung Electronics, said: If you’ve tried local AI, you’ll know it can be quite slow, especially if using the larger parameter models. By developing this new solution, Samsung says that storage is evolving from just storing data to a core piece of infrastructure that supports AI computation, too. The Korean company said that UFS 5.0 integrates the latest embedded memory interface standard from JEDEC and achieves up to 10.8 gigabytes per second (GB/s) transfer speeds. Regarding write speeds, Samsung UFS 5.0 can reach 9.5 GB/s. Both the read and write speeds are twice as fast as those of the previous UFS 4.1 standard. Aside from being ideal for local AI, Samsung’s UFS 5.0 is more power efficient by 40% compared to UFS 4.1. Samsung achieved this by implementing innovations such as clock gating and multi-voltage technologies. UFS 5.0 is also ultra-compact at just 7.5mm x 13mm x 0.9mm; that is 16.7% smaller than UFS 4.1. The company said it will be bringing it to multiple devices in the future, including mobile, wearable, and extended reality.
    • A bit like the steamdeck, this probably isn't for you.
    • Gamers Nexus already did their review, and building your own will be faster and cheaper, so not very convincing.
    • They've told outlets who got review units that it isn't. Partially because they believe that contributes to closed ecosystems. GamersNexus also believes this is because Valve's fighting a monopolistic practices lawsuit in Europe right now. They've also never subsidized any of their past hardware efforts and well, they definitely aren't subsidizing the Steam Deck right now.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
    • First Post
      mike_rumble earned a badge
      First Post
    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      496
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      209
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      99
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      86
    5. 5
      neufuse
      69
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!