PDA

View Full Version : Review GDC: Battlefield 3 is Beautiful


Mike Nomad
03-02-2011, 05:34 AM
http://www.raidersmerciless.com/images/ars.png



Battlefield 3 first footage: the humans move like humans



http://static.arstechnica.net/assets/2011/03/bf311-thumb-640xauto-19916.jpg



By Ben Kuchera | Last updated about 6 hours ago

EA's Battlefield 3 event was everything wonderful and terrible about gaming journalism. I waited in line, herded like a cow until I put on a name tag, was shown the open bar, and was handed a piece of meat on a stick to eat until the game was shown. The crush of people was fantastic; EA seemed to have underestimated the amount of people who would be interested in the game. At one point they separated those who were press and those who weren't, those without a press badge were asked to leave the main floor, and they had to be content with a lesser seat while still enjoying the free drinks.

"Ears plugs are not a bad idea," I was told before the trailer began. There is a reason they wanted those of us who wrote about games on the floor—the floor itself was part of the sound system, bashing the bottom of our feet with the rhythmic sound of gunshots and explosions. My ears began to ring instantly. The screen was large and the graphics were overwhelming. We learned nothing about the game.

The best part of the demo was the fact that every control on-screen was a mouse, and we were told that the PC was the lead platform for the game. Seeing such a high-profile game shown to the press at an event on the PC is a rare thing these days, and it made me very, very happy.

The game looked great, the character models are amazing, and the environments crumbled and were blown away in a very satisfying manner. The game looks absolutely astounding, well above what we're used to from first-person shooters, and it may give gamers the excuse they've been looking for to upgrade their systems.

So go ahead and take a look at the trailer, tell us what you think, and get out the Motrin... I have a terrible headache. The event did what it was supposed to do, we were rocked by the video and everyone left suitably impressed. Now I just wish we had the chance to play the damned thing.

The event was mostly flash with very little substance, but the flash is enough to get us excited. There will be time for more information, and we're sure to know more around E3, but for now the hype trains continues. We saw a little more than than the trailer shows at the event, but we won't ruin the rest of it. Enjoy, and tell us what you think!

I want this so bad

SOURCE (http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/03/battlefield-3-looks-amazing-but-we-still-know-nothing-about-it.ars)

battlefield-3-looks-amazing-but-we-still-know-nothing-about-it

***************



GDC: Battlefield 3 is Beautiful


by Charles Onyett - March 2, 2011

No more spin-offs. Finally, a true sequel.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 was an amazing first-person shooter. But with every Bad Company release and spin-off, I couldn't help but wonder what DICE was doing with its main Battlefield franchise. As it turns out, it had something to do with earthquakes.

The core games, including Battlefield 1942 and Battlefield 2, helped define what's possible in multiplayer first-person shooters. It's been more than five years since Battlefield 2 on PC, and now DICE is finally getting ready to deliver the next numbered entry. Battlefield 3 (http://pc.ign.com/objects/142/14209865.html) has a release date for this fall on Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC, and from what's been shown off, it looks incredible.

That's because Battlefield 3 is being built using all-new technology developed in-house at DICE. It's the next version of the Frostbite engine used in the Bad Company games, appropriately called Frostbite 2. It allows for a range of advanced graphical effects and destructible terrain. "We actually started with the engine three years ago," said executive producer Patrick Bach. "When we finished Battlefield 2 and 2142 we talked about what's the next big step that changes gaming. We're good at technology and we wanted to create something that scaled better than Frostbite 1 did. The PCs were already -- three years ago -- starting to get ahead of the consoles. How could we make good use of that?"


<center>Battlefield 3 Gameplay Footage</center>
CsfTksi_kHs

The result was, at the end of a demo recently shown to members of the press, a detailed scene of a US Marine unit getting tossed around on a quaking bed of asphalt in a war-torn city on the border of Iraq and Iran. Buildings crumbled into pieces, sending up plumes of smoke and dust as the ground fluttered like a flag in the wind. One even toppled over onto an attack chopper hovering in mid-air. It looked strikingly realistic.

"We knew we could do better stuff with audio, we needed a core streaming system for the whole game," said Bach. "Everything from animations to objects to textures to audio we can stream. If you look at the consoles today they still have the same amount of memory, so how do you make a denser experience with the same amount of memory? You need to be able to flush things in and out of that memory that you have. Frostbite 2 was more or less a necessity for us to be able to build Battlefield 3. If we didn't build the engine we couldn't build the game because then it would just be an iteration instead of a big step forward."

So far DICE isn't showing off any gameplay footage of the multiplayer component, which is too bad. I really wanted to see jets streak across the sky and launch precision strikes against unsuspecting targets. But even without the spectacle of controllable vehicle sequences to gape at, the story mode still looks pretty good. The characters are in no way related to those in the Bad Company games. What you get in Battlefield 3 is a fresh start. It's set in 2014, and an early mission follows a squad of Marines as they charge through cramped, dangerous streets and take cover from sniper fire on rooftops. "It's based on a 'what if' scenario," said Bach. "We see the world as quite unstable. We see it as the shot in Sarajevo where a small event can create a butterfly effect to start a world war." Even though the mission was early in the game, it sounds as though the scale of the conflict shown is going to ripple out into the rest of the world.

Though the mission features a group of Marines, DICE notes that these characters won't necessarily be in subsequent sorties because it's not a squad-based game like Bad Company. You play as Sergeant Henry Blackburn who, at the mission's outset, emerges from an armored personnel carrier with an M16 equipped with an ACOG (that's a scope). The road ahead is packed with smoke and fire, cowering citizens, military humvees and an LAV reconnaissance vehicle.

According to Bach it's not possible to simply hop into these vehicles and start driving, as many Battlefield veterans may want to do. While there will be several vehicle sections in the single-player portion, the game makes it clear when you're meant to hop into a machine and when you're supposed to proceed on foot. "When you tell a story you need to control the player in some ways, even though we have very sandbox-y elements as well. We make sure you get to try out everything…so we pace the game as a tutorial so when you go into multiplayer you don't feel scared. If you play through single-player you will feel quite safe to go online because you tried everything once."

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/115/1152917/battlefield-3-20110301103947461-000.jpg (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/142/14209865/imgs_1.html)
Little does this guy know he'll soon get hit by an earthquake.

The PC version was beautiful even in its current pre-alpha state. DICE is focusing on using lighting and animations to create a more realistic look for Battlefield 3. For animation, DICE is utilizing Electronic Arts (http://games.ign.com/objects/025/025025.html)' technology called ANT, developed for sports games like FIFA. So what does that actually mean? "We can now more or less blend from any animation to any animation without any glitches. Some animation systems are very rigid. The cool thing with this is that you can blend from one animation to another at any time. You can see that with FIFA --, it's super quick and nimble."

The animations were especially impressive to watch during a first-person hand-to-hand combat sequence. Black was underground in a bunker attempting to disarm an explosive device when he was accosted by a waiting enemy. To subdue the assailant you need to hit buttons at specific times to deliver viscous strikes and chops. The attacker eventually crumples to the ground, but not without getting in a few solid shots on Black, which causes the perspective to tilt and whip appropriately with the force.

A lot of work is being done at DICE on the moment-to-moment mechanics of gun fights too. When you open fire the screen shakes, your weapon effects dominate the speakers, and the bits of user interface flicker when . "The challenge with weapons is actually not to get them to look realistic or record sounds, the research is quite easy. The hard part is to transform the emotion when you fire a gun and turn that into picture and sound."

The user interface shown off so far is not final, but it's clear DICE is hoping to minimize its appearance during play. Displays for ammunition and grenades are down at the bottom of the screen and take up only a small amount of space. An objective listing pops up only briefly when a goal is completed or added. There's a small compass in the bottom left that points you towards your current objective, and onscreen there's a single, unobtrusive icon to designate the fellow Marine you're supposed to follow into combat.

The UI will also let you know what's possible with any selected weapon. With the M16 you can switch between three firing modes – single shot, semi-auto, and full-auto – and can flip on a flashlight. At certain points there are also button prompts when, say, a teammate falls over and you have to drag him back to safety. According to Bach, dragging bodies will not be a feature in the multiplayer component.

DICE is also putting significant effort into tuning the artificial intelligence in Battlefield 3 (http://pc.ign.com/objects/142/14209865.html). There will be no respawning waves of enemies here. Every encounter has a finite amount of hostiles that react dynamically to the demands of battle. "I think the core to any AI is a good sensing system where you prioritize on vision but also sound. And then of course they need to exchange information between them. So when they scream and yell, that is actually stuff that is happening on the scene. We don't have random chatter. Some games do that quite a lot, but it doesn't reflect what's actually happening." In Battlefield 3 when enemies scream they're reloading or taking cover, that's exactly what they'll do. The idea is for DICE to create enemies that are challenging because they're smart instead of numerous.


http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/115/1152917/battlefield-3-20110301103941758-000.jpg (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/142/14209865/imgs_1.html)
Pulling friends to safety is not a multiplayer feature.


The presence of smart enemies means you can expect to get shot quite often. DICE isn't yet confirming what type of health system will be implemented. It might be regenerative, it might be a hybrid style, or something else entirely. "We know there are pros and cons. We want to make sure that when we talk about that, we take it seriously. For some people that's a very important part [of the game]."

One aspect of video games that gets less attention from the press is the audio. DICE knows what it's doing in this department based on the sound design in Bad Company 2, and is hoping to improve on that tradition with Battlefield 3. This includes making sure every weapon is not only recorded accurately, but also recorded accurately depending on whether it's being fired in an indoor setting or outside. DICE is using what Bach calls HDR audio. "It's not about volume anymore, it's about decibel. If you go from 10 decibel to 120 decibel in real life, you would not hear the whisper as the explosion went off. Our brains are adapting to the audio landscape at that moment."

"What we're doing is we give all sounds a decibel and then we have our sound engine move your digital ear through that spectrum in real time. That's why we don't have to mix audio manually because the game engine does that for us." Essentially that means while enemies fire their weapons, they'll be loud up until the point where you fire your weapon, which will dominate the audio and drown out other lower decibel sounds, such as footsteps. "It's not that we cut out the footsteps, they're still there, but your ear doesn't pick that up because there are so many loud sounds."

I can understand if some are reading this and already worrying how expensive a system they may have to craft to take advantage of all these features. According to DICE, the demo shown was running on hardware that can be purchased in stores today. Considering the game hasn't been optimized yet it ideally means the game won't require a preposterous setup to look nice and run well.

http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/115/1152917/battlefield-3-20110301103937539-000.jpg (http://media.pc.ign.com/media/142/14209865/imgs_1.html)
Battlefield 3 is very pretty in motion too.


Some may not care as much about a single-player experience given Battlefield's multiplayer-only roots. DICE has already said that there will be jets, the ability to go prone, support for up to 64 players specifically for the PC version (24 on consoles), as well as a tweaked unlock progression so you can customize your class in a bunch of ways. It doesn't sound like the Commander mode from Battlefield 2 will return in the same form, which hardcore PC players may be a little ticked off to hear. "This is not Battlefield 2, so people might not love all the choices that we've done," said Bach. "The world has moved on, so has DICE. We are changing stuff for the better, but you never know what the fans will say."

There's little quite as satisfying in an online match of Battlefield as dominating the map through expert manipulation of the in-game vehicles, specifically those that take off into the air. It sounds like, for the jets at least, there'll still be a bit of a learning curve so not everyone will be able to hop into a plane and instantly turn the tide of a match. "I think the goal for all the Battlefield games and all the vehicles is that it's easy to control but hard to master. Everyone should be able to take off and fly, but not everyone should be an elite pilot. We're not building a simulation, but also we're not trying to make a stupid, dumbed down experience for vehicles."

Even though only the single-player has been put on display so far and DICE didn't want to talk about co-op at all, it's hard to be anything but excited for what's sure to be one of the most talked-about games of 2011, don't you think? It sounds like DICE is going all-out for Battlefield 3.

SOURCE (http://pc.ign.com/articles/115/1152917p1.html)

miregrobar
03-02-2011, 05:45 AM
One word - awesome!

Mike Nomad
03-02-2011, 08:28 AM
Caution..... the above was PC SINGLE PLAYER ONLY.


While it does look quite good.... please reserve your decisions until we SEE actual footage of the multi-player side of this game.

Do not forget the head games played upon us with BC2. :wink2:

Icey
03-02-2011, 08:51 AM
looks great but like mike said, ill w8 a bit untill i see some mp footage and setup of the game.

wakka
03-02-2011, 09:35 AM
Caution..... the above was PC SINGLE PLAYER ONLY.


While it does look quite good.... please reserve your decisions until we SEE actual footage of the multi-player side of this game.

Do not forget the head games played upon us with BC2. :wink2:

Always frustrating for users

Most people get a game for MP not SP in this genre

Mike Nomad
03-02-2011, 10:02 AM
Always frustrating for users

Most people get a game for MP not SP in this genre


Yep, no truer words were ever spoken.


We really should wait to see what we get with the MP release....

Mike Nomad
03-02-2011, 10:20 AM
http://www.raidersmerciless.com/images/pcg1.png

Battlefield 3 first impressions and screenshots


By Tim Edwards | 02/03/2011 08:06am

It’s loud. So very, very loud.

The first public showing of Battlefield 3 took place this evening at an off-site event at the Game Developer’s Conference. There, select press were shown the first chunk of a the single player campaign, and what the technology behind the game; the Frostbite Engine 2, is capable of.

Last year, EA attacked Call of Duty’s hold on the Christmas shooter market with Medal of Honor, with limited success.

This year, Battlefield is going to mount a full blown assault on CoD’s dominance. The good news is: it’s built for the PC, to showcase what the PC is capable of. And it’s the best looking PC game in the world right now.

The demo opened with a precis of the tech. Frostbite 2 uses animation systems developed for sports games to give characters heft and weight. As the soldiers turn into doorways, you can see the weight shift on their feet. The destructability of the old Frostbite engine has been ramped up; bullets can chip away at masonry and concrete, while full bore explosives can tear down entire buildings. And when buildings collapse, they don’t vanish in a cloud of smoke and magically transform into burning husks – the destruction is more complex – signage wobbles and shakes, concrete awnings tumble down. The sound is as violent and deafening as Bad Company 2; bullets echo and snap with nightmarish cracks.

But it’s the sheer visual quality that’s the real star. I think it’s down to the lighting – the bright sunshine of the Iraq level was extremely impressive. When the demo transitioned to the indoors, shafts of sunlight shone through any open windows, creating gorgeous pillars of dust. It absolutely looked a step ahead of last year’s big shooters.

http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/03/Battlefield-3-screenshots-Staging-Area-590x331.jpg (http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/03/Battlefield-3-screenshots-Staging-Area.jpg)


The game demo was split into four sections all taking place in Iraq. The storyline states that the PLR are involved in an insurgency on the Iraq border. US soldiers are sent to blow them up. Or something. I don’t think the Battlefield 3 team are overthinking the story.

The first slice saw the team drive into a staging area in a APC, while one of the lead character’s team-mates complained of not doing his taxes, the other worried about how they were disembarking way off their expected position. As they exited the APC, they walked through a very busy US checkpoint. Following a briefing from a commander (find the missing US soldiers. they’re…. over here somewhere) the team run through abandoned buildings, kick in a few doors, and dodge a PLR patrol. At one point, the team pause as the ground beneath them begins to shake. “We’re on a major faultline,” remarks one. That’s called foreshadowing.

As they exit a garage, the game enters slow-motion, and one of your friends is sniped. Nooeees! The dev playing dragged him back into cover a mini quick time event. Minor point – it was pretty cool to see the usual Press A or B replaced with WASD. Then, a full bore firefight broke out.

http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/03/Battlefield-3-screenshots-Sniper-590x331.jpg (http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/03/Battlefield-3-screenshots-Sniper.jpg)


This is where the demo was less impressive. Battlefield’s single player campaign is clearly a tightly scripted, tightly controlled shooting gallery. In the demo, there was little evidence of enemy soldiers using their own brains to find cover and avoid getting shot. Nor did your team-mates do anything to really help out. The player simply pointed the gun at the baddies heads until they fell over. There was a brief moment when the developer used a grenade to blow a chunk of balcony away to reveal a sniper (complete with satisfying ragdoll wheeling through the air), but mostly the player lined up headshots until the PLR began to retreat.

Following the retreat, the player attempts to track down the source of an IED, following a long wire into a basement bomb factory. He crawls through a ventilation shaft (yay, shafts! it’s a PC game alright!) before finding the remote detonator. As he tries to unplug it, he’s punched hard in the chest by an enemy. There then follows a vicious no holds barred fight from first person in which prompts to click the left or right mouse button in the appropriate corners of the screen are followed by punches, kicks, and a quite brutal knee to the tummy. It reminded me of a more controlled version of Mirror’s Edge’s melee fighting. In fact, the whole game reflected DICE’s experience with Mirror’s Edge – there was a real emphasis on maintaining the first person perspective while constantly reminding you of your own physical presence. It’s always good to look down and see your legs.

http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/03/Battlefield-3-screenshots-School-590x331.jpg (http://media.pcgamer.com/files/2011/03/Battlefield-3-screenshots-School.jpg)


The third section of the demo was more interesting, and used the destruction tech in a more creative way. The player’s squad comes under heavy sniper fire on a rooftop. Each rifle bullet creates a shockwave in the air – and pings off plantpots, concrete, and the pipes and air-conditioning units that offer your only cover. The player crawls to the edge of the rooftop with his squad who, on a count of three, all offer suppressing fire while you fire an RPG into his spider hole. The RPG round is a little bit too effective – the entire frontage of the hotel the sniper has been hiding in collapses. “Good effect on target,” jokes your team-mate.

The final section of the demo was a full blown ground battle in the heart of the city. Infantry were joined by tanks and helicopters in holding a vital pedestrian bridge. Now I write that, I’m wondering exactly what was so vital about the bridge. Is the green cross code considered destabilising?

The player lay down and used a machine gun to mow down dozens of soldiers, while the helicopter hovered above, hosing incoming jeeps with round after round of tracer. As each wave was pushed back, the player shifted to another side of the intersection, until finally, he leapt onto the back of jeep, and used the mounted turret to hold back the hordes.

“Great,” I thought. “A mounted machine gun bit. That, right there, is the future of games.”

But, immediately, the ground begins to shake violently. It’s an earthquake. The concrete splinters and shatters in a terrible wave, infantry are knocked off their feet, and the player is bounced out of the jeep. Then, the buildings around him start collapsing, one by one. At the final moments of the demo, a skyscraper falls directly onto the helicopter, which crashes onto the player.

I was impressed with almost everything about Battlefield 3. It’s beautiful, sounds awesome, and has some impressive destruction tech. But I wasn’t entirely convinced. For all the fire and fury of combat, the AI of the enemy soldiers didn’t impress, nor did your team-mate seem to want to help. That needs work. And I’m desperate to see what the developers do with Frostbite 2.0 in multiplayer. But, I came out grinning, if deafened. I can’t wait to play it. And I can’t wait to play it on PC.

Battlefield 3 is out in Autumn. You’ll hear it coming.

SOURCE (http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/03/02/battlefield-3-first-impressions-and-screenshots/)

Mike Nomad
03-02-2011, 11:44 AM
Behind the Scenes with EA's Battlefield 3 and Frostbite 2 Engine



http://common3.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/28/0,1468,i=282994,00.jpg



By Natalie Shoemaker - March 2, 2011 09.00am EST



http://common7.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/28/0,1468,i=289423,00.jpgBehind closed curtains at an EA event a few weeks ago, I received the opportunity to view one of the most hyped games and game engines of 2011—Battlefield 3 and Frostbite 2. At the super secret demo I had the chance to preview a new age of macro and micro destruction, gameplay, and lighting and audio effects that can only be experienced in order to understand—all thanks to DICE's new Frostbite 2 engine.

The Battlefield 3 demo was being played on a Maingear (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2374877,00.asp) custom boutique tower that was most likely tricked out with liquid cooling, several graphicscards (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380794,00.asp#) (Nvidia or ATI, they wouldn't tell), high-end processor—the works. Needless to say, Battlefield 3 and its Frostbite 2 engine are made for the PC (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380794,00.asp#).

I sat down with executive producer Patrick Bach from DICE to talk in more detail about the Frostbite 2 engine and why it makes Battlefield 3 one of the best shooters in town.

PCMag: What's changed from the first Frostbite engine?

Patrick Bach: I would say, actually, we rewrote it from scratch. Because we came to the end of the road when it came to that technology (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380794,00.asp#). We did some really, really cool stuff with the first Frostbite engine, like really cool tools, a lot of lighting solutions, and its destruction. We had to get that engine to build the Bad Company 1 and 2 games, but we had problems with taking a big step forward. Because of new rendering technology, we needed streaming for everything in the game, also a lot of the tool sets didn't quite work as they should.

So, we came to the conclusion, more than three years ago, that we needed to rewrite. Because we want to move into the next generation, because PCs are there, but there's no software (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380794,00.asp#) to prove it. There's all these tech demos, but there's no "killer app" that proves what the PC can do today with the CPUs and GPUs. So we just said we wanted to do a sequel to Battlefield 2 (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1853454,00.asp), which actually pushed the envelope quite a lot, we need to do the same thing again. The problem is that, though the world is getting much more complicated with the costs of [developing a game] now [they] are much bigger than what they were five years ago, so we just said if we have the money to do it, if we have the time to do it—let's do it. We've had some successful projects, so let's go for it.

PCMag: During the demo, on the rooftops, the vast expanse made me reminisce of Mirror's Edge, did you build off of that tech at all?

PB: Mirror's Edge was built on bought technology, that's Unreal.
But of course we like our own games and we get inspired; a lot of the physicality of Battlefield 3 comes from the thinking behind Mirror's Edge. So the fact that your hands are a part of the world—it's not just a gun on a stick—it's actually a character that moves around. You can see your feet, you can see your hands, you can touch stuff, you can interact with the world. A lot of thinking comes from Mirror's Edge and that's what you want.

We see [the Frostbite 2 engine] as an investment. The Frostbite engine can deliver quite a few games once it's done, and since Battlefield 3 is the flagship title that will more or less release the first version of the engine, we dictate what that engine is by designing our game. So we are in a very good position of having a great big technology team building the engine and a game team building the game and can work together very closely, so we sit in the same building, on the same floor.

PCMag: How have you improved the AI (artificial intelligence) from the Bad Company series?

PB: It's the classic stuff, you need to find the weak spots and get rid of them. It's a combination between actual—it's nav data, plus AI behaviors, plus animation, generally. If you get the nav data right you can generate and have dynamic destruction, and on top of that you need to have good robust AI behaviors that you can control and tweak. Then the animation system, which we are now borrowing from our friends at EA Tech, it's like FIFA and those animation systems, which is probably the best on the market and we built it—EA, so let's use it. So we took that and pushed it into the engine. And the AI, you could say that the AI looks good even doing stupid stuff ([I]Laugh).

So you get away with more by having great animation, to be honest. AI, to be honest, has very little to do with AI in games, because it's a perception on humans rather than artificial intelligence. Because if it was really intelligence it would own you, it would make sure that it won against you, and that's not what want as a gaming experience. You want to have a controllable—

PCMag: So have you implemented more of a game director?

PB: Yeah you could say that, you can call it a game director, but it's actually different behaviors that read the whole sensing system of an AI you could say is the director of it. Because the sensing system is based on hearing and seeing, but also seeing and hearing other NPCs. So depending on what happens, it will change direction and change behavior, so it's not only you that can change the behavior of NPCs, it's NPCs affecting each other. AI is a very blurry thing to talk about since AI is...if you look at it from a chess computer worst case scenario, that's not what you want in games. You don't want it to be too clever, so you want to dumb it down in a good way, so it still feels natural.

You don't want a shooting gallery, it's a delicate balance on how you build that AI, because what I'm saying is it's not that it's easier to build something that has less AI, it's actually more complicated, because then it's more based on psychology. What are my expectations of a human behavior? And since you can't simulate that. So anyone that tells you 'Oh we have a perfect AI,' they're lying.

PCMag: I notice there's more concentration on the micro and macro scale of destruction, where as in the Bad Company series it was more: You shoot this wall and this pre-rendered section falls down. So how were you able to get that together?

PB: That's something we learned a lot from the Bad Company series and what is the most effective way to do it. Like all entertainment, it's a lot of different systems that help to create this illusion of things happening around you. So the destruction system is actually built up from different destruction systems where you can actually chip off pieces of stuff, but if you have a house falling that's not the exact same system, so you combine all these systems with the effect system, with the actual moving around polygons system together with sound and other tricks to create this illusion.

We were more or less alone in doing it. If you look at other games, having destruction is ... eye candy only where there's no tactical change in the gameplay, or it's more of a gimmick where it's about destruction. To us destruction is a part of the world, it's as natural as footsteps or gun sounds. If it looks like it can break, it should break. So destruction is definitely something were pushing the envelope on.

PCMag: Are you at worried about how consoles are going to be handle this, how do you think it going to translate?

PB: I think it's going to translate well, since we've built console games before, so we know what we can and can't do. The whole engine is designed to be scaleable from PCs (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380795,00.asp#) to consoles, so I'm not too worried about it. It's just the question on where do you draw the line on the feature sets. The experience should be the same, so we won't remove the animation system from the consoles, we won't remove the structure from the consoles—all the components will be there it's just a question of the quality of the different platforms.

PCMag: Is there anything else I should know?

PB: Well, there's a lot you should know but I can't tell you (Laughs).
Audio is something that we are extremely proud of. Since we more or less invented what we call HDR audio system, which gives us a more vivid sound scape than in any other shooter. It's not only me, we're getting a lot of awards for it. Just compare any shooter with us and you will actually hear the difference. And the cool thing with the core of that system is that, like HDR lighting where you can only see a certain amount of light at one time. You have the really dark areas and you have the really bright areas and depending on where you look, your eyes will adapt to the situation.

That's the exact same thinking with the audio system where we [have] decibel zero and decibel 200, and we have a sliding scale of what you can hear at one certain time. So if everything is completely silent you can hear a pin drop, but if someone blows a grenade next to you then the decibel on that grenade is so much higher so then the whole scale moves up to a higher end on the spectrum and you can only hear the loud noises. That creates a very dynamic world and it also gives our sound designers freedom to design the world based on what it actually sounds like. So you don't have to spend time changing volumes dynamically as you play, because the game will do that automatically. [The sound designers] can spend more time with the creative stuff, creating the sounds or adding more artistic layers of music or video that everyone should hear that should be center speaker /mid-range for instance. So there's a lot of cool tricks we're doing that no one else is really trying to do...yet, which is weird because we've been doing it for quite some time now and we are getting credit for it, but no one is—I think the problem is no one is rewriting stuff. Because they are building on the old stuff, you can't do these things.

We are just setting all these values and you create a very natural and dynamic environment, so we are just doing the obvious I would say.

PCMag: So is there any rating on the game yet? I imagine it's going to be rated M for mature, since I counted two 'f*cks' in the beginning of the demo.

PB: We actually were talking about this before, asking for permission to not have any boundaries on what we are building, because we want to build a cool game. And if we need to adapt to a 13 or T then that starts to cut away stuff. We've done that before where it's like 'Oh you need to cut away this stuff and this stuff' and it's like 'Well, we want it to be like this, our audience can handle it' move it up to 18, whatever. So to us it's not like 'Oh we need to add more gore and cursing' it more about us letting us do what we think fits the actual experience. Again, we are trying to build a more mature game, as in a game for grown up, rather than a game for 13 year-olds. So I'm OK with that.

Battlefield 3 will be available Fall 2011 for PC, Xbox 360, and Playstation 3

SOURCE (http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2380794,00.asp)

Icey
03-02-2011, 01:33 PM
really like the fact they talk alot bout how its really made for the pc and then for consoles, not like made for consoles and then to the pc.
BF3 defo got my attention and i hope its comming our way the way we want to see it for a change, so the complete package incl tools ( hardly dare to say the word anymore since most companies flip when they hear that word:d)

prolly alot of hope in my text but trying to be optimistic :)

GrymmWolf
03-02-2011, 02:21 PM
One word - awesome!

I wholeheartedly agree, I even still play BF2, the graphics seem a bit dated but the gameplay is solid. :wink1:

Shaldag
03-02-2011, 03:10 PM
The Vid looks amazingly great. I suspect it has to do with Post Prod rendering. The Final product will prolly look great but what kind of rig will you need ?

I appreciate the fact, I am delighted that they are pushing PC yet in this economy, who has the money to invest in super souped up gaming Pc in order to just play this 1 game that pushes the envelope?

Speaking 4 myself I would have to buy a new rig around the $1500 or more range .

As much as the game is great , it would be hard for most gamers who have a family to justify the expense.


So yeah I like what I see, and maybe the MP will be as smashing good as the SP vid.

Wait and see the hype blow away and then make a decision based on gamers reviews , and not Joystick or IGN.