That's right im playing BF3 on PC .... first game i was looking forward since Starcraft 2.

But that doesn't mean ... well it means, that i FINALLY saw the reality of Frostbite 2 as it's being so hyped ... even yahtzee made a remark on it in his video.

The point is , frostbite 2 is just not competing IDTech5 at all. And if those are all bugs that can be fixed, might be but im anolyzing this currently and it might not be the engine's fault , but the way they code things afterward in balance.

Here's the reasons:

Gunplay is inferior to IDTech5:
- animations block control response
- everthing takes more time, like switching weapons , you always have to wait before the animation is done and the event lasts a bit longer.
- i currently don't have much specifically to point out but it just kind of solider gameplay feels klunky - just that feeling i cannot describe but i sense - no such problem with Rage.


Destruction Physics in multiplayer are a complete joke. The airplanes falls down like throwing sticks and planks and just shatters like totally unrealistic there's no bending or twisting there's just weird stuff how it crashes, on the bug side: the feedback system isn't completely correct at times, sometimes you don't even know when you've been hit by a missle, you don't see anything, no visual indication.

Then there's the NET code, first of all, servers appear a bit sluggish for BF3, noobs put 64 slots on crappy hardware/bandwidth.
Part of this is, one of the bigger problems, that there's always some risk of out-of-sync issues when an object is in contact of another or wall or ground. Why doesn't the rubberbanding happen in mid air but it must happen when there's a contact, it's just weird, most of that is seen when airplane crashes, major problems in animation pipeline there. Like this: you hit a lightpole the screen goes blank, then replays the crash, the crashing seen jittering around and the shakey screen, you don't even know when your dead, the visuals are out of sync as well as the explosion, you crash engulfed in flames ... before the crash , then the explosion happens like 1 second later ... weird.

The whole world in BF3 is so ... kind of static if you can picture that ... it feels anologe, it so much differs it's beginning to be unexplanable fully as that would need much work not just remembering my normal gameplay.

Klunkyness is quite a wide problem , placing something on ground oh my god beacon and radio, sneaking in prone and the interaction with the terrain rocks invisible solids is sometimes very annoying for snipers that want to navigate on those cliffs,

Jumping over walls feels clunky again, primarly animation events just are "thrown in there" ... doesn't feel like it's part of the gameplay.


On some occasions Controls are like: I press a button/mouse, and 3 things happen in the trigger + animation, and i don't want that third thing or i want to repeat it or do another action , but not you can't CANCEL it or override with another trigger, you need to wait for that to finish before the game registers other controls it's just so darn annoying. It might not be happening with all controls since i play game overall with most classes and vehicles.



For Rage --- i haven't even finished it... maybe if i come across something in rage, but i did like 10% for testing out stuff, seriously the game/gun play is just so fluid it just has that undescribable secret spice on top that just feels better than any other game.

Well i hope these are standalone bugs in BF3 ... but the engine so far i haven't seen it anything special as ... the whole klunkyness ruins it's image whatever might be under the hood.


Now i can practically see what Carmack meant all these years at those interviews, and it does make a huge difference, the whole feel of the game and it's fate is down to good way programming logic , well worth your effort ! <--- Tell him this feedback! , i belive he doesn't read forums every day.

Im not viewing it in realistic way, i want something that plays great and BF3 is sometimes feeling like COD just because of these annoyances and it ruins the FUN just for sake of Realism ? not worth it --- realism in gaming should be made elsewhere were's actually appropriate and makes sense, so it doesn't make the game annoying. I don't want realism in gunplay.

Try Stalker, any of em'. The best guns, the best gun mechanics and AI to die for. Seriously they will hunt you down and kill you. The AI in Rage is kinda pitiful except for the close in stuff. They do bob and weave well.

It is a bit too realistic for most of the people who like 'hero' games though. The devs do want to humiliate you.

I know BF3 and Rage can't be compared directly ... but they seem to share similar level building, it's not sandbox style as Cryengine.

Also some people are saying that while it's impressive, it's still only Bad Company 3 ... i haven't got experience with BF franchise so i don't know how good/bad it is, but as i said the whole thread ... those are some issues i had never expected.

Id is definitely the king of run-n-gun shooter dynamics. As much as I might like other games with flasher graphics or whatever its always the id tech engine based games like Half Life 2 that I can't get enough of. That would be my dream come true if id and valve got married, but it would be one of the oddest couples in history and the children might be even more strange.... Best to leave well enough alone. Hopefully someone else will come along and develop the basic physics in the id tech 5 just as valve did for the quake engine. Too bad they've decided not to licence the engine to anyone not using Bethesda to publish their games. Hopefully that will change with the id tech 6 and we'll see a future version of Half Life and Portal with some eye popping graphics to go with all those physics and great stories.

The problem with id tech 5 is that it is only good for corridor shooters. Carmack has said you cannot build anything more open on the engine. Because of that he has to compete with CODMW3 and BF3 who have immense followings already.