Thread: I told you so!

Kinda caught me when I noticed loading a map the resolution got smaller (down to console size)
(I took these from loading the campaign in case you were wondering. But yes it happens when you load a multiplayer map too.)
Notice all the extra black room from where the resolution shrunk:


http://cloud.steampowered.com/ugc/61...07D652EFC42E4/

If you have a SL that is a 'non flag capping sniper camping douchebag' as a SL... bring it to the admin's attention. That goes against TPG's 'non-teamplay' rule.

So I have a question for all the EA haters, who is doing it better? You can say Valve, but as I have mentioned in other topics The L4D series is for a max of 8 people, and I don't know very many people that left BF2 for TF2, so that leaves them with CS:S as their last popular high population game, and it is how old?

Activision, id, whomever is the latest to pick up the DN franchise? Let's face it, no developers are making teamplay based games for PC that will support 40 plus players, so you can shit on EA all you want, but they at least are the best smelling of the shit piles.


Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by CivilWars

So I have a question for all the EA haters, who is doing it better? You can say Valve, but as I have mentioned in other topics The L4D series is for a max of 8 people, and I don't know very many people that left BF2 for TF2, so that leaves them with CS:S as their last popular high population game, and it is how old?

Activision, id, whomever is the latest to pick up the DN franchise? Let's face it, no developers are making teamplay based games for PC that will support 40 plus players, so you can shit on EA all you want, but they at least are the best smelling of the shit piles.


Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

Wait...shit smells good? Just exactly WHAT are you eating, Civil?

Originally Posted by Gasrim

News: Battlefield 3 lead platform 'switched to consoles' mid-development - ComputerAndVideoGames.com

*sigh*

I mean I still really enjoy the game despite many things I would like to see changed but that at least explains why there's no in-game voip and why PS3 gets the back to karkand map pack a week earlier.

GAYEST THING EVER considering PS3 players never even had Karkand in another game. It was a freaking PC map.

Civil - I wish to play games with friends and clan mates. Most of whom are all TPGers and BF franchise fans, as I have been since 2142. I will likely pick up the game so that I can continue to play with my friends and clan mates. I'll do so, hopefully, after the first few patches (as DICE has always had a tough time patching things - that is not an exaggeration) and at somewhat of a discount. However, I do that grudgingly as EA has all TeamPlay gamers by the short hairs as you so poignantly pointed out. That doesn't mean I have to enjoy the tugging on the short hairs. Especially when they get ripped out at the root.

I was a fairly vocal detractor of BC2 at the outset, as it was unplayable for me. That improved over time. But it was a $50 perorder that sat useless for well over 4 months. Was I happy about it? No. Does the fact that BC2 holds more enjoyment now than it did mean that my original complaints were invalid? Nope, not in the slightest.

For those folks that are playing the game and having no issues, great more power to you. For those who have played it and experienced issues, sorry to hear that. For those who have yet to pick it up yet for one reason or another, such as myself, when you decide to take the plunge or not is entirely up to you.

But, if someone is going to turn around, like many here have done and continue to do, and attempt to shut me up or minimize my thoughts or opinions on the matter when I am arguing them constructively and in general with facts to back up the criticisms based on sound reasoning and historical precedent.....I think yall can hear the unspoken thought on that.

This is a place that we can discuss, argue, belabor points or minutia....there are a great many people that feel as if there are valid complaints against DICE and their current (and future?) business practices and model. Several among them are admins, such as myself, and upstanding and contributing members to TPG, such as myself. They have every right to voice their grievances or at least their bile. It's sad to see DICE do this to the BF franchise. It's just as sad to me as watching Valve turn TF into a freakin hat shop. For the same reason.

I also refuse to lend validity to the argument "Well there's no one less bad than DICE so DICE should be feted and praised on high." It's specious at best.

In my opinion DICE should have been up front about what this thing that they labelled BF3 was actually going to be. Calling it the successor, or true sequel, or spiritual "______" to BF2/2142 is BS, all semantics aside.

As others have said, I'll eventually wind up playing because of the friends and relationships that TPG and the BF series has fostered for me. Without those things though, DICE wouldn't be getting my money. And they'll not be getting full pop from me ever again. And no pre-orders either. There are a lot of others that feel the same ways too.

It's not blind hate or nerd rage or whatever meme you'd care to apply if it's true and represents a break from what made the BF series the deep tactical teamplay game that it had always been known as.

Trust me when I say I am no fanboy. I still think BC2 is a waste of my money, but then again so are both of the CoD games that I bought. I am not saying you shouldn't feel free to voice your opinion, just to me it gets old, from both sides. I am not in the Kraker camp where I think the game is perfect. I do see the flaws, and point them out as well.

Now, let's look at origin. I see people bitching about it, but last I checked I was required to install, and run, steam to play CSS, tf2, and/or DOD, yet I hear nothing but praise for valve/steam. Double standard much?

People bitch about battlelog, but I have no problems with it. Maybe I am one of the few, but my guess is many just bitch because it's new.

What is my ideal situation? I would love it if we had the maps, tactics, squads, and VoIP of BF2, the destruction, AA, weapons, and kits of BF3, with the usability of steam. Now, if that were available I would call anything that didn't live up to that a piece of flaming donkey shit, but guess what, it doesn't exist, and likely won't for the forseeable future. As sad as it is consoles, and the 13 year olds that play them, are king right now. If I were the owner of a for profit game developer I would cater to those kids every day of my life. I almost guarantee that if any of the top publishers went to a model similar to the sports franchises where a new title came out every year, and all it has are some basic graphic upgrades and new "players" it would still make millions.

Now, as a gamer that plays for the exact same reasons as you I do feel shafted. I have to choose between 7-10 year old games, or games that fall short of my ideals. Both choices suck, but at this time the only other choice is to give up gaming, and that ain't happening.

All the whining just gets old, and what does it really change?


Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk