DICE "Considering" Mod Tools for Battlefield 3 and Defends 30 Frames-Per-Second on Console

In an interview with AusGamers at this year's GamesCom, DICE's Karl-Magnus Troedsson defended the team's decision to release Battlefield 3 with no mod-support on the PC, but also gave hope to the community by offering a "we are considering it".

He also touched on the 30 frames-per-second versus 60 frames-per-second debate, by reminding us every Battlefield game released on console from there thus far has run at 30 FPS.

"We have heard the community very loud and clear on this topic -- that they want mod tools," he said. "We are considering it, back in the studio. The game won’t ship with mod tools, but we have heard it. I’m not saying that we’re going to do it, I’m saying that we are thinking about it."

Read Full Story >>
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
Serjikal_Strike3102d ago

It will happen...just a matter of time

latinalover3102d ago

they want to sell all their DLC first

Coffin873101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

Still, with this Origin-Software they're pulling worse privacy-breaching BS than Activision ever did.
That made them go down on my list a few damn places.

RedDead3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

Yea...but it's EA

latinalover3102d ago

but EA wants money. and it will have twice of DLC than BC2

Bladesfist3102d ago

BC2 only had 2 payed dlc's the rest was free. Vietnam and SA skins. (PC)

darksied3101d ago

I don't know about you, but I would WELCOME more DLC for Battlefield 3. I don't care if EA wants money or if they're there to just cash in. I will look at each DLC separately and see if they are worth it and then decide. It's better than having NO options.

lategamer3101d ago

They may not be Activision, but there EA. EA, known for milking franchises, closing development studios, etc. Like Activision, there a business, there goal is to make money.

killcycle3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

How did you get 3 disagrees?
People on this site think that Acti & EA's priority's are to please the consumers?

Hell no, they want to milk and they will milk more and more with every new game released.

Dev costs go up every year with the standard of gaming constantly being raised. It's bound

specialguest3101d ago

People forgot that EA was the original "evil empire" of the video game industry.

Livin_in_a_box3101d ago


+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3101d ago
user8586213102d ago

hell yh bring on the mod tools!!!!

raytraceme3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

the people that have a problem with 30fps game should have a problem with halo as well as killzone, as well as crysis 2, and any fps at that. I hate toolbags that complain about a game that is 30fps cause i know 99% of the people that complain about bf3 being 30fps play halo as well ;)

evrfighter3102d ago

it's the cod fanboys last line of defense. the walls are crumbling and they're hoping it will save them.

Jack_DangerousIy3102d ago

Crumbling down with the new Frostbite 2 engine! ;)

blumatt3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

I don't think Call of Duty has any "walls crumbling". There's no damage in those games. hahaha I hope CoD gets damage in the next generation of consoles.

Anyway, Battlefield 3 is going to rock, regardless of its 30fps framerate. I played the hell out of Bad Company 2 and I NEVER had an issue with the framerate. Its multiplayer was amazing.

lategamer3101d ago (Edited 3101d ago )

Call of Duty is a completely different type of game. Yes, it's a first person shooter. But Battlefield is more of a Sandbox, Team Shooter. Call of Duty goes for a quick, arcade type of shooter.

Battlefield vs CoD is stupid, because they are completely different types of FPS.

theonlylolking3101d ago

BF3 is BF2 with pretty graphics. Just like how MW3 is MW2 with tweaked perks.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3101d ago
NatureOfLogic3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

FPS means a lot, after I finish playing a game of COD then go play BF, It feels like Im moving in slow mo. Im guessing FPS has something to do with it.

I would love to play BF3 on a PC one day and see if there's a difference with playing BF3 at 60fps rather than 30.

ZombieNinjaPanda3102d ago

>feels like I'm playing in Slow Mo

Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that you can't run around like a marathon sprinter in Battlefield.

Lazy_Sunday3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

...people will have no qualms with it. It's games with lots of framerate drops at 30FPS people have issues with--games like Crysis 2. And that's the problem many people fear with Battlefield 3--not that it won't be a quality game, just that it might operate at the 'visceral' 30FPS like Crysis 2 (which is really 15-25FPS, and that's just visually unappealing). It's completely natural to experience doubt in a product, especially in this economy where games have become investments of time for gamers. I hope we see more console footage soon. Smooth, constant framerate is a big part of keeping a quality gameplay experience.

CloseSecond3102d ago

Agreed. 30fps is just fine but if it drops below that, especially when there is lots going on then I'll be disappointed.

I have to say that I'm still disappointed that trees, grass, etc don't react from a shockeave.

AKS3102d ago

There are lots of sacrifices a developer would have to make to get 60 fps. People act like the only factors are resolution and frame rate. I've found the Battlefield games to be extremely impressive considering the visual quality, scale, and especially physics. You can bring down an entire building with people and vehicles moving around inside of it. Do you think that's a simple thing to do while maintaining detail and fairly large maps on a 6-year old console? I'm amazed it runs so well considering everything it does.

SJPFTW3102d ago

lol its funny because 60 fps means jack shit if you lag all the time or someone is lag switching. COD latency is inconsistent and sometimes a total lag fest. I have enjoyed much more smoother experiences on BFBC2 and halo

Jocosta3102d ago

Strange that you just threw that statistic out there on how "99% of the people that complain about bf3 being 30fps play halo as well". What kind of research or case study did you perform to come up with that number? Or shall I translate? It should read: "I hate Halo and it's fans so much that I just had to come up with some remote way to take a jab at them". Does that sum it up? I play Halo, in fact it's my favorite FPS. Don't get me wrong, I am not offended or pissed off, because I give fuck-all about your opinion, I am just curious.

Fez3101d ago

He wasn't taking a jab at Halo fans... he was pointing out the hypocrisy of bashing one game for being 30fps but not another. You must be a little offended or at least very defensive to take the time to misinterpret someones statement and post a comment?

Heartnet3101d ago

erm why mention fps? Oh yeh Mod tools obv equals start trolling ...

So what if they play Halo? they might be sad thats not 60 fps... just cuz they play a 30 fps game does not mean they wudnt have it at 60..

raytraceme3101d ago

When was the last time black ops ran a fluid 60fps on consoles anyways??? On the ps3 it's more like 45 and on the xbox its more like 55. Though mw2 was better optimized than black ops and ran at an avg. 58+ on both consoles.

Bad Company 2 ran a fluid 30 fps. And from the ps3 gameplay it looked pretty fluid to me ;)

theEx1Le3101d ago

I'm sorry but thats not true, I play BC2 a bit and it defo does not stay above 30fps all the time. On heavy metal especially the frame rate spirals in high intense battles. But to be fair thats to be expected, the size and scale of most of the maps in bc is unreal, especially for consoles.

BubbleSniper3101d ago

no problem. give the consoles as much as they can handle I say. I am not going to play this day 1 unfortunately. I just abhor Origin and wont cave in for it. long LIVE STEAM.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 3101d ago
Quagmire3102d ago

Sure when DICE defend 30fps, everyone's ok, but when its Ninja Theory or Slightly Mad Studios, it ends up in a shitstorm.

3GenGames3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

Everyone's okay except the people who try to name stuff COD is better at. FPS may be that, but with the crap engine, it doesn't mean anything for the gameplay loss from having it run at 60FPS. :)

Lazy_Sunday3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

Ninja Theory set their standards with 60FPS on their games. It's what grabbed the appeal. It's almost imperative when the action you're used to is so smooth and fast.

Slightly Mad Studios gets crap because racing games don't tend to require a lot of power on the processing end. When you add in destruction, open world environments and realistic effects, we can understand. But in a racing game, based on going around a track a couple of times, the graphics are expected to be great and fast paced. I don't see the shit they are getting, since nobody's playing their games anyway. The last good NFS game I played was NFSU 1&2, and after they decided to milk the franchise even further to yearly releases, making the madden of open world racing, I stopped playing them. Then I guess they decided to take a step backward, and the game's just taken a turn for a worse. I mean, NFS: The Runs--I mean Run?

Quagmire3102d ago

Lmfao, Shift 2 is imo better than Gt5 and Forza. Maybe thats why no one is playing it, they're ignorant.

As for the run, its shaping up to be great, but obviously the general public dont think so due to the mentality that "OMG its teh another NFS GaEm, its soooo gay, lulz"

Lazy_Sunday3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

But better than GT5 and Forza? That's a little much.
In my opinion, I feel as if NFS is just trying to clone every other racing game today, instead of doing what it did best and what made me and so many others enjoy the series. I don't want any more futuristic street racing bullshit. I don't want another lap driven track racer. I want a game that follows the simplicity of the title: "Need for SPEED." I want something fast, dangerous, and a game I want to play. I don't want a heavily story driven, linear based racing game, but I think it's going in a better direction. I still think it's a huge step back from an open world street racing game. And a lot of others agree with me.

vyke33102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

dude you have got to be kidding me. 60 FPS is necessary in fighting and racing games like GT5 or DmC, but 30 FPS is the standard in shooters.

beavis4play3102d ago

you are 100% correct. 60 fps isn't necessary in shooters.

Voxelman3102d ago

@ beavis4play well console shooters anyway, old school PC shooters benefit a lot from 60fps when you are moving (and spinning 180 degrees in under a second) as fast as you do in some of those games.

vyke33102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

yes you are right. any pc FPS game needs to have 60 FPS because of using a mouse. im really worried that in CS:GO pc gamers would have an advantage over ps3 gamers because of the frame rate differences. (even if ps3 gamers use mouse/keyboards)

nickjkl3101d ago

you dont need 60 fps to do well in an fps on pc

whos telling you people this

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3101d ago
Heartnet3101d ago

So true.. i remember when NT mentioned 30 fps the amount of hate that flowed through the comments was unbelievable...

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3101d ago
Theo11303102d ago

Am I the only pc gamer who doesn't know how to mod?

fossilfern3102d ago

I dont really know how to do it either, but i respect the people who do know. Seems very time consuming. Just happy they do it :D

Tony P3102d ago

Making mods can be complicated and require a pretty hefty amount of effort, especially if you want to make a good one.

But you usually don't need to know more than how to find the readme to install them.

AKS3102d ago

Create them or use them? Using is usually not difficult, but if you're creating something substantial, no, I don't have the skills to do that.

Theo11303102d ago

creating, like you said using them isn't difficult but I have no idea what it takes to create something.

3GenGames3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

Yeah, creating them especially for modern games would be crazy, as you'd have to figure out their compression, data format, and a ton of junk. If they release that info it'd be 1000x easier, which I'm sure they will. But it's still not a walk in the park. People who make the tools are pretty skilled programming wise. :)

Mr_Lu_Kim3102d ago

Visual C++ experience is a good start and being able to wright in script.

eclectified3102d ago

When Half-Life 2 had come out, I remember playing with the source mod tools. I couldn't program to save my life, but the draw for me was the ability to create maps from scratch. I started to create a map based on the design of the school campus I was attending, but I never even got close to completion. I'd love to give it another go with a BF3 tool set now that I'm done with school.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3102d ago