ZTGD | Battlefield 3 Beta – Kneejerk Response

Michael Futter writes: The Battlefield 3 Beta is now open and, as we hurdle ever closer to inevitable clash of the military shooters, it’s time to cut through the hype and get a feel for what EA and DICE are bringing to the table. The most important thing about my kneejerk reaction to the beta is that this is my take on things. The beta is open on every platform and you should play it to form your own opinions.

You can also listen to this week's N4GPodcast to hear what other members of the crew had to think about the Battlefield 3 Beta.

[A-Glorious-Dawn]

Its true that operation metro feels like a COD map.

I have been getting ridiculous kills with the pistol and sniper that I usually only get on COD. At least the recoil is far better than most games I have played...

I actually like the beta, my biggest gripe is the jaggies but they will surely be tamed come release.

still going to buy the game day 1, because having not played Caspian boarder I've been informed that I have seen nothing yet.......

I think the reason it feels like COD to me is that, on console, they have allowed the sensitivity for the analog sticks to be upped to a nice level. BC2 was slow for me as I got used to playing on 10 for cod, This feels right but it allows for some lethal moves on console. -people accuse me of auto aim all the time- :(

[jamstorr86]

This article made me laugh.
"Additionally, the teams felt unbalanced, with weapons available to level 1 players feeling more powerful on the attacker side than the defender side" - Er, the same weapons are available on both teams?

"Teammates also indicated that the game felt exactly like Medal of Honor" - well yeh, DICE made both.

There is also a general feel that the guy was dissapointed by the lack of vehicles and such and only one map. Jesus, the BETA is free and is there for testing purposes. Do people expect DICE to give us 50% of the games' content in a BETA, AND expect people to buy the final version too?

So much bitching about this game, and people saying they are dissapointed. However, at end of the day, these same people rave about COD, when that is just the same game wrapped up in a different packaging. At least DICE is trying to take the series forward.

Let's all calm down, and save our judgement for the final version. I just hope people don't spit out their dummy if the textures aren't 100% awsome. Its about the fun and playability. Zelda looks like crap but loads of people love that game. Save with ff7, I mean the sprites look like triangle puppets for christ sakes! hahaha Still an awsome game.

[PaladinXII]

Please note that I (and nearly everyone I played with) commented on the weapon balance thing. Note that I said "felt" like the weapons were unbalanced.

As for DICE making both games, the company isn't (or at least shouldn't be) a one-trick pony. Medal of Honor didn't feel like past Battlefield games, so why should one assume that the new Battlefield would feel like Medal of Honor?

As for this being a "beta," I think you are putting too much stock in what we are being told by EA/DICE. This close to release, this is not a beta. It's a demo and a horribly broken one. As for your assertion that my expectation is that EA/DICE should give us 50% of the game, it's a little silly.

One additional map, with a more open design with vehicles is something we should expect given Battlefield's storied history. You don't really believe that's 50% of the game.

In past Battlefield Betas (ya know, real "please test and report" betas), they've given us exactly what I stated in the article. One or two open maps, vehicles, etc. Clearly, that hasn't hurt sales, especially since the beta/demo multiplayer gets switched off at release so people HAVE to buy the full game to keep playing.

I'm not a CoD fanboy. I'm not even planning on purchasing Modern Warfare 3. I was pretty clear in the article where my multiplayer preferences lie, in fact.

Your arguments are hollow, and you've conveniently discounted my statement at the end of the piece encouraging people to play the beta for themselves and form their own opinions. Instead, you've decided to call my opinion out as "wrong." I'm glad you are enjoying it, but given how close we are to release, I wouldn't expect the glaring issues in the "beta" to be magically fixed.

[jamstorr86]

Look, you and everyone else are too quick to slate the game when the final version has not been released yet. The donwload for th BETA was 1.6GB or something like that. Think of how much data, such as textures and scripting, would take up.

Let's agree to disagree. Personally, I enjoy the BETA and will definitaly be buying the game. I win. I win because many people, who have slated the BETA, can't enjoy the game because of not superb textures. If something such as a texture or sprite stops from someone enjoying a game, well I feel sorry for them.

[PaladinXII]

I'm glad you are going to play it and enjoy it. That's the most important thing.

Unfortunately, equating size to build quality is incorrect. The game is ONE map, ONE mode. If it were the size of a full retail disk, I would be confused. Also, I'm not talking about textures or scripting. I'm talking about play style, weapon balance, etc. If you can use a LMG as a sniper rifle, something is wrong. I saw plenty of people doing just that.

I'm not sure where in my piece you found discussion of the graphics. I purposely avoided that conversation because I recognize that is something that WON'T be representative of the final.

You are confusing my concerns with the beta with a lot of other noise coming from the community. To be fair, if you are going to take issue with MY comments, please restrict your criticism and rebuttal to things that I actually said.

[DMLFury]

I'm sorry jamstorr86, but I believe I win. Because I'll be playing Dark Souls way before Battlefield releases. You lose I win. I feel sorry for the people who don't enjoy Dark Souls.

[BeardedPriest]

The defenders don't have american weapons which are a little better.

[PaladinXII]

Thank you for clarifying. Glad to know that our perception of the imbalance wasn't incorrect.

[5119ent]

I love it

[DMLFury]

I think calling this a "BETA" is very misleading. How much can you get fixed in 2 and a half weeks? This was a stress test for the servers and that's it. They may as well have called this Battlefield 3: Multiplayer Demo, and be done with it. Everyone wants to bring up Call of Duty Vs. Battlefield. I'm not getting either one. You've played one military shooter, you've played them all.

[ZeroTolerance]

Call of Duty!!! They took urrrrr jobs!

[emekcrash]

It's been said one million times, this is an old build.

[ZeroTolerance]

Then why is it called a "beta"? Old build means old demo, beta means we are testing for fixes.

[DMLFury]

Why put out an old build? All it's done is hurt the possible sales of the full game. I know of at least 6 people whgo cancelled their pre-order after playing the "old build beta."

[emekcrash]

Because they said they are testing the dedicated servers... wow. Do some research.

[BeardedPriest]

I don't really believe its an old build... That could be a lie. Why would Dice risk losing sales with that laggy buggy twitchy peace of crap... Why not put the newest build out?

[jamstorr86]

I am losing faith in the intelligence of gamers. While I respect the comments by PaladinXII and had a good bt of banter regarding the BETA build, to suggest that this is what the final game will be like is stupid. Seriously, they called it a BETA, if it was a DEMO they would have called it a DEMO. This isn't politics, the games speak for themselves, and so they don;t really have a reason to lie. The majority of video game sales are generated by adverts and opinions of friends and such. Hardcore gamers, such as those who visit these boards, only make up a small proportion of the total sales figures. So lying to us makes little difference. If Hardcore gamers' opinion really effected sales, COD sales would be crap!

[PaladinXII]

While this might not be politics, there is a similar level of brinksmanship that goes on in game PR and marketing, especially when you've got an overhyped title match like BF3 vs MW3. Calling something a beta vs demo (especially when the "beta" is only really being used to test server load) has a healthy dose of marketing consideration involved. Heck, even demos include the "represents a work in progress and is not representative of the final product" disclaimer language, so calling it a demo wouldn't have implicated final build quality either.

Also, having spoken with MW3 devs, it's very interesting to hear the different takes on the supposed battle between the two games. EA has been building this up as an either/or situation. The CoD guys don't care. In fact, they have been consistently complimentary of DICE. EA is picking the fight, set its release date earlier than expected and has even picked slogans and advertising to go head-to-head with CoD. They've built their marketing around the competition and that is rarely a good idea.

I think you are correct. A lot of the bugs are going to be fixed and, there is even a claim that they have been fixed ALREADY. This should take care of the wiggly warm crawling animation, falling through the map and hopefully, the balancing issues like the LMGs being used to snipe.

However, regardless of whether its fact or fiction, this beta is leaving a taste in peoples mouths that isn't at all what EA/DICE want. Yeah, I'm back on the perception is reality thing again.

As for games speaking for themselves, it discounts the role of PR and Marketing (and the ENORMOUS budgets that go along with them). Games don't speak for themselves. They are rarely allowed to. There is always someone spinning the story.