DICE Tries To Put End To Battlefield 3 Controversy, Sends One Last Message To Gamers

Last Thursday on Late Night With Jimmy Fallon was supposed to be a time of jubilee for DICE, the makers of Battlefield 3, and gamers alike. But what first was an awesome show, turned into a controversy between console and PC fans, with certain PS3 owners expressing disappointment with the quality of the PS3 footage shown on the show. Even Xbox 360 was brought in the mix and DICE has rarely said anything concerning said platform.

DICE’s Rendering Architect Johan Andersson has had enough. He’s about to stop talking about the game in full on twitter, but before he leaves, one last message must be relayed.

Read Full Story >>
Kon4723d ago

This guy is awesome. He answers to EVERY question that the fans ask him on twitter. But some 'journalists' take those answers and put them completely out of context. I won't be surprised if he stopped talking to the fans.

zero_gamer4723d ago

Some gamers just enjoy whining for the sake of whining. Of course the PC version will look better than the console counterparts. We all should know this by now.

I thought the PS3 footage looked great.

Dart894723d ago

I agree man im a ps3 player and the graphics looked great for a console game im not b**ching about the game im just anxious to try out the beta and then get it when it's released.

NukaCola4723d ago

Who's complaining? The game looks great

RememberThe3574723d ago

Any rational person thinks the PS3 version looks great. It's a handful of whinny little girls that need to shut their mouths.

And thanks crappy journalists for doing the opposite of your job.

Can't we now start banning these horrible sites?

deadpoole4723d ago (Edited 4723d ago )

As Lt. Col. James 'Rhodey' Rhodes said in Iron Man 2 ... "DEAL WITH IT". This game is gonna be awesome, PS3 version will be 720p native with some form of anti aliasing (which bfbc 1 and 2 didnt have) + BF1943 and 4 Maps from BF2. Game graphics wise will be polished to its finest till month before its release date.

What more do you want ???????

So stop with all this hate ... BF3 FTW.

Sarcasm4723d ago

Oh well, I'm buying the PS3 version anyway to play with my buddies.

I'm going to have the PC version too just to enjoy it in all it's glory.

joydestroy4723d ago

someone always has to ruin it

evrfighter4723d ago (Edited 4723d ago )

what the hell does posting on twitter twittering/twitting/tweeting accomplish?


it does more harm to celebrities, sports figures, and business and industry figures than it does good.

The way I see it if you are a celebrity type you have nowhere to go but down if you're using twitter.

DaTruth4723d ago (Edited 4723d ago )

Why do developers keep responding to stupid online nobody critics, trolls and fanboys craving attention over the net? They are giving them exactly what they're looking for!

They always give this stupid platform to the vocal minority and since it works it will never stop! Ever notice how no matter how awesome something is, there's always one or two stupid dudes trolling by putting it down

The reason they do it is because nobody will talk to them otherwise and now they have successful videogame devs talking to them, when there's no chance of this happening otherwise!

Tru_Blu4723d ago

Ya I agree. I hadn't saw the ps3 version in question until I just watched it on that site. I don't know what anyone is complaing about, looked really good to me.

darksied4723d ago


Oh man, why can't we do what this guy says? How about a 70% crap rate more than once (2 separate articles) means the site is perma-banned? That would be awesome.

Army_of_Darkness4723d ago

I won't lie.. On pc it looks amazing, but when i see it on consoles it looks like your typical military fps...

HardCover4723d ago

It may look typical but it sure as shit won't play typical

Lifendz4722d ago

He also said this: "I love talking directly to gamers, but too many troll journalists out there so think I’ll have to shut up about #bf3 details for now, bye."

Couldn't agree more with that. We have way too many troll journalists looking for hits. Even last week when that PR firm made the statements about some people being malicious in their reviews of DKF which, for some reason, prompted all game reviewers to act as if he was talking about them directly. If you listen to podcasts you heard all those guys bishing as if he said the media as a whole was being unfair to his game.

Enough already. These guys have to stop twisting things around to make something out of nothing.

Oschino19074722d ago

My main gripe with this game and the reason I may not buy it is.... I will feel totally ripped off buying it for console, I mean come one. We will be paying the same as PC players but getting a watered down version with not as much content or performance.... SO WHY IS IT WE ARE PAYING THE SAME PRICE AGAIN?

I just feel like PC is getting this totally awesome game which is mostly funded by CONSOLE gamers, so why do we get the short end of the stick and being told to just accept and deal with it... Console has supoported the franchise for the last couple of titles they have released now, selling well over 2:1 compared to PC, but atleast the games werent very different and only a few things missing compared to PC. Now they are going above and beyond with the the epicness and we console players are gona be left to pick up the check buying millions of watered down copies for console to support the PC crowd. If anything I think its good people call them out because many still dont realize the vast differences that there will be between both console and PC, sure hardcore gamers or those on forums all day will know but not the average consumer/casual console player especially if they were never into the BF franchise before.

Now I am not saying the game will suck or anything. It will still be a good game and knock COD on its ASS but I just cant in my right mind support a company when I personally feel like I am getting ripped off. Maybe if it ends up $40 or something, I will be all over it then, but I doubt anything like that would happen. Tired of being someone that helps to support all the crying whiny PC elitist that feel entitled to everything and that in their "words" are somehow better gamers overall by default... If they want such a huge epic game why dont they go out and buy enough copies to support the franchise instead of relying on the people they bash daily who fork out the money to support the franchise. Console is gonna be paying for all the goodies PC gets over them. We all pay the same but we (console players) buy many more copies and get less of a game while being told to be happy about it... Sorry but no, I am not happy about that at all... Either make the game cheaper or make a whole nother game for console, dont COD us and bullshit straight to our face about how its fair and equal if you just look at it from their view, which is the money and profits point of view... Not supporting it! Not as of now, maybe if they sweetin the deal for us console players but I doubt that would happen..

Oschino19074722d ago (Edited 4722d ago )

@Digital Raptor

Still waiting to get an answer as to why its OK that we PAY THE SAME EXACT PRICE. NO reason PC should get so much more and still be the same price as console...
Its like buying two of the "same" cars, having the same names and prices but one is a bare bones base car while the other has upgraded cosmetics, performance and features. Why would you pay the same price for the bare bones car becuase its all you can afford to maintain while someone else gets a top of the line performance machine with all the bells and whistles just because they can afford to maintain it...

Game will be great, not questioning that, just questioning the reason behind why they think its cool to charge the same for both VERSIONS of the game. They could always drop the price for console or throw us some extra worth while features that PC wont have to even things up a bit. I would be happy with that and actually WANT to give them my money, but as of now I am finding it hard to come up for reasons why I SHOULD give them my money.

Lich1204722d ago


Its the same damn game. They aren't doing more for the PC, the PC is just capable of doing more. I don't know what you think making a game is like but Im fairly certain whatever impression you have is completely wrong. They aren't spending more time making the PC version, quiet likely they're spending less time actually since it requires less optimization and fine tuning to get running excellently.

BlackKnight4722d ago (Edited 4722d ago )


The only thing you are missing out on console is 64 players and Cutting edge graphics and 60FPS/3D/120FPS/Multi-display. You still get the BF2 maps and the same DLCs, everything.

You can't have cutting edge graphics on consoles. They are 5(PS3)to 6(360) year old machines. Optimizing a game gives SOME performance and graphics upgrades, but no where NEAR what having DX11 and 2011 CPU's and GPUs, etc.

KZ3, uncharted2/3 and God of war run at 720P and at 30 FPS (God of war FPS is unlocked, can fluctuate above 30FPS) and those 3 games are on a MUCH smaller scale (Uncharted 2's largest MP map is MAYBE half the size of the smallest BC2 map, White Pass), less players online, no vehicles besides KZ3 mechs. Halo Reach runs at 30 FPS, 700P and has large open areas (still only a fraction of BF3 size maps) and Gears of War map sizes are similar to Uncharted.

NONE of the above games come even CLOSE to the amount of destruction BF3 offers.

Graphics are limited first by the hardware, then the developer, its not the other way around.

You want to know why I play my PC more than ever now instead of my xbox and PS3? Because I hate paying 60 dollars for a new game (especially multiplat) that is almost always 10 dollars cheaper on PC, looks worse than even a low end gaming PC, runs at half the framerate (most games are 30fps on console), dealing with a higher amount of immature players on console, custom content/mods on many PC games, no worry about a "service" to go down like XBL/PSN, and even though exclusive games look great, it is still relative, once you compare to PC they are average.

It's not like buying a car, there are two purchases. If all you own is a camp fire and a piece of metal, you can't complain about a pancake mix costing you the same money as someone with an electric stove. No matter how much they work on making that that pancake mix good, you still have to cook the damn thing with an out-of-date campfire and slab of steel.

pixelsword4722d ago (Edited 4722d ago )

@ blackknight:

As far as 64 players, MAG sez hai.

As far as

"Cutting edge graphics and 60FPS/3D/120FPS/Multi-display& amp; quot;

Sony just announced a television which will take one monitor and split the channel so that two players will appear to play with their own monitor, so although I don't know what the fps will be for those games on that set, but since Lair was 1080p and a (wobbly) 60fps in 2007, I'm sure that sooner or later someone else may be able to match a five-year-old game... or else re-hire the Factor 5 crew and make the best darn-tootin' games this side of HAL-9000.

Lich1204722d ago


Mag may have had massive multiplayer but its graphics were not even close to the level of BF3. Its a give and take. Sure you can have 256 people running around, but not at the same fidelity of 24 players.

BlackKnight4722d ago (Edited 4722d ago )


Yes, Mag does say hi:


Blurry, low res, no HDR, small view distance, no destruction, No realtime lighting beyond characters and STILL maps smaller than even BC2.

Lol, lair? Really? That game was a mess graphically, controls and gameplay. 1080P and 60FPS is nothing when your texture resolution on everything is practically n64 level. Only the dragon and certain enemies looked decent.

KZ3 in 3D runs at 640x716 BARELY at 30FPS, that's almost PS2/Xbox 1 resolution. Not only that, the smoke effects, explosions, dust, etc when in 2D are rendered at 640x360 (again, in 2D!), but go to 3D, and now it runs at a measly 320x360!




GG is supported by Sony, has already made 2 PS3 exclusive games, and you think some magic dev will come along and make a game that has 3D and 1080P and 60FPS? Even 720P and 30FPS in 3D and graphics similar to 2D KZ2 or UC2 just cannot be done on the PS3.

pixelsword4721d ago

@ Lich120:

Erm, That's probably why I said

"As far as 64 players, MAG sez hai"

I didn't say it had this or that in terms of resolution, I only mentioned the number of players. And MAG still has a 1up on the PC because there's not a game as of yet that does 256 with the level of graphics that MAG has, so it's not bad for it being not so great.

@ BlackKnight:

You're basing my point on past articles, I'm basing my point on a television that's not out yet.

You see the problem with your point?

pixelsword4721d ago (Edited 4721d ago )

Also @ DarkKnight:


a little different when you use actual HD screenshots.

deceive moar.

Lich1204721d ago


Right, but as I mentioned player count is based on graphics capabilities. No one is saying massive player counts isn't possible on consoles, mag proved that. All people are saying (the devs) is that 64 players with the graphics of BF3 is not possible on consoles. I for one, believe them and do not think they're being lazy about anything.

+ Show (21) more repliesLast reply 4721d ago
BubbleSniper4723d ago (Edited 4723d ago )

Looks like examiner needs to examine themselves.

now we caught examiner with proof, trying to skew words for hits.

“I love talking directly to gamers, but too many troll journalists out there so think I’ll have to shut up about #bf3 details for now, bye.”


news4geeks4723d ago (Edited 4723d ago )

The guy who wrote the examiner article, Jon Ireson, hangs around n4g if the pic is anything to go by. Show yourself Jon and give us all an apology :)

edit: there he is down in comment #10