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

    • Pretty nice tool, thanks
    • Indeed. But note that this has Wifi7, HDMI 2.1, BlueTooth 5.4, and 5G Ethernet, so even in the additional features list this bundle blows the Steam Machine away. And, with the money saved, one could improve this dramatically.
    • One of the strangest galaxies in our Universe could help answer some long overdue questions by Sayan Sen Image by Pixabay via Pexels | Not representative An international team of astronomers led by the Department of Astronomy at Tsinghua University has discovered an unusually metal-poor galaxy that may contain signs of first-generation star formation. The galaxy, named Metal-Pristine Galaxy COSMOS Redshift 3 (MPG-CR3), or CR3, was identified using observations from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), the Very Large Telescope (VLT), and the Subaru Telescope. The findings, published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, describe CR3 as the most metal-poor galaxy known from the period known as "cosmic noon," around 11.5 billion years ago. Cosmic noon refers to a period when the universe was producing stars at its highest rate and galaxies were growing rapidly. In astronomy, "metals" refers to all elements heavier than helium, including oxygen, carbon, and iron. Because CR3 contains so few of these heavier elements, researchers say it closely resembles what scientists expect the earliest galaxies in the universe may have looked like. The discovery is significant because it could offer clues about Population III (Pop III) stars, the first generation of stars thought to have formed after the Big Bang. These stars are believed to have formed from gas made almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, before heavier elements were created inside stars and spread across the universe through supernova explosions. Hence this is why CR3 has been referred to as a "living fossil." Scientists have long believed that Population III stars existed only in the very early universe. As more generations of stars formed and died, they enriched surrounding gas with heavier elements, making the conditions needed for metal-free star formation increasingly rare. Because of this, researchers expected the formation of such stars to have largely ended after the epoch of reionization, a period when radiation from the first stars and galaxies transformed the neutral hydrogen filling the universe and made it largely transparent to ultraviolet light. CR3 appears to challenge that idea. The galaxy was observed at a redshift of z = 3.193 ± 0.016. Redshift measures how much light from a distant object has been stretched as the universe expands and helps astronomers determine how far back in time they are looking. In this case, the redshift corresponds to roughly 11.5 billion years ago during cosmic noon. Although the universe was already several billion years old by that point, CR3 shows characteristics more commonly associated with much earlier galaxies. Observations revealed exceptionally strong emissions from hydrogen and helium, including Lyα, Hα, and He I λ10830. Lyα, or Lyman-alpha emission, is a specific wavelength of light produced by hydrogen and is widely used to study distant galaxies. Hα emission is another hydrogen signature commonly used to trace active star formation, while He I λ10830 is produced by helium and can indicate the presence of very hot, young stars. The measured equivalent widths of EW₀(Lyα) = 822 ± 101 Å and EW₀(Hα) = 2814 ± 327 Å are among the highest ever observed in star-forming galaxies. Equivalent width is a measure of the strength of an emission line relative to the surrounding light, and such large values are typically associated with intense and very recent star formation. At the same time, researchers found no statistically significant detections of metal emission lines, including [O III] λλ4959, 5007 and C IV λλ1548, 1550. Emission lines act as chemical fingerprints that reveal which elements are present in a galaxy. Oxygen and carbon lines are commonly seen in galaxies that have already undergone significant chemical enrichment. Their absence in CR3 suggests an unusually pristine environment. Using abundance calibration methods developed with JWST observations, the team placed a 2σ upper limit on the galaxy's gas-phase metallicity of 12+log(O/H)<6.52, corresponding to less than 0.7% of the Sun's metallicity (Z < 7 × 10⁻³ Z⊙). Gas-phase metallicity measures the abundance of heavy elements in a galaxy's gas. A 2σ upper limit indicates that the true value is very unlikely to be higher than the quoted threshold. Even when accounting for uncertainties in the calibration methods, the most conservative limit remains 12+log(O/H)<6.95, making CR3 the most metal-poor galaxy identified at cosmic noon. The galaxy also appears to contain very little dust. Researchers measured a Lyα/Hα flux ratio of 13.9 ± 2.5, a result that suggests negligible dust attenuation, meaning very little of the galaxy's light is being absorbed or scattered by cosmic dust. Because dust is usually produced by earlier generations of stars, this finding further supports the idea that CR3 has experienced very little chemical enrichment. Further analysis using spectral energy distribution modelling, a technique that compares observed light with theoretical models, suggests that CR3 contains an extremely young stellar population only around 2 million years old. The modelling, which used Population III stellar templates, also indicates the galaxy has a stellar mass of approximately 6.1 × 10⁵ M⊙. The symbol M⊙ represents one solar mass, or the mass of the Sun. One of the key questions raised by the discovery is how such a chemically primitive galaxy could exist in a universe that had already spent billions of years producing heavier elements. To investigate this, the researchers examined CR3's surroundings. Their analysis suggests the galaxy may lie in a slightly underdense environment, with a density contrast of roughly δ ≈ −0.12. An underdense region contains less matter and fewer galaxies than average. The team suggests that this relative isolation may have helped preserve pockets of pristine gas. Metal-rich material expelled from nearby galaxies may never have reached CR3, while the lower rate of galaxy mergers and interactions could have slowed the mixing of enriched gas into the system. If future observations confirm these findings, CR3 could provide some of the strongest evidence yet that first-generation star formation continued well after the epoch of reionization. Such a result would challenge the conventional view that pristine star formation ended by z ≳ 6 and suggest that small pockets of metal-free gas survived much longer than previously thought. Researchers stress that more observations will be needed to determine the galaxy's true nature. Future spectroscopic studies with higher resolution and better signal quality could help confirm whether CR3 is genuinely hosting Population III star formation. The discovery is also expected to encourage searches for other similar galaxies, which could help astronomers better understand how the first stars formed and how galaxies evolved in the early universe. Source: Tsinghua University, IOPscience This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "I think in the immediate absence of a partner to apply relief" In the words of Sterling Archer... "Phrasing!"
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      HidekoYamamoto94 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • One Month Later
      timbobit earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      nates earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Rookie
      dorf went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      161
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      107
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      83
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!