Battlefield 3

In regards to PC vs console.

jonnymendoza forgot the most important part to why Battlefield is better on a PC.
Flying a plane properly without a joystick on the ready is imposible if you want to be amazing. I always have my joystick on the ready when playing Battlefield 2(PC not BC) and Desert Compat.

Here is also the specs that someone requested.

Minimum System Requirements:

OS: Windows Vista or Windows 7
Processor: Core 2 Duo @ 2.0GHz
RAM: 2GB
Graphic card: DirectX 10 or 11 compatible Nvidia or AMD ATI card.
Graphics card memory: 512 MB
Hard drive: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version

Recommended System Requirements:

OS: Windows 7 64-bit
Processor: Quad-core Intel or AMD CPU
RAM: 4GB
Graphics card: DirectX 11 Nvidia or AMD ATI card, GeForce GTX 460, Radeon HD 6850
Graphics card memory: 1 GB
Hard drive: 15 GB for disc version or 10 GB for digital version
 
Last edited:
Not sure how reliable those are, I don't think they're on anything official. GTX 460 is supposed to be a good card but to be a recommended card? Seems a little low to me.
 
klashman69 said:
Ok, so how powerful does the CPU have to be to play Arma? Quad core?
Click to expand...
yea quad core.

More quads doesnt equal to more faster powerful cpu's though on some occasions.

So even though a xbox 360 has 3 cores. in terms of raw performance and power, it cant even beat an old dual core2 intel cpu.
 
DagsJT said:
Not sure how reliable those are, I don't think they're on anything official. GTX 460 is supposed to be a good card but to be a recommended card? Seems a little low to me.
Click to expand...

With regards to PC specs the game will run fine with the recommended.
Just wouldn't play it with the minimum.
 
Last edited:
PC users, try going to:

https://bf3alpha.battlefield.com/

As some people are not being emailed keys but get a key when logging in. Not always successful and some suggesting it might depend on your previous Battlefield rank? Worth a try anyway.
 
I have a quad core and couldn't play Arma, lol.

I think I need a better graphics card/more ram possibly... got 2gigs at DDR2-800 I think. My quad core is an Intel Q6600 @ 2.40GHz.

If I was to update my graphics card, would it be okay for gaming?

Also, they need to get the knifing system sorted quick, if it's anything like that in the full game it'd be a disaster.

Call of Duty COMMANDO like disaster.
 
What graphics card have you got? I think ARMA relies a LOT on the graphics card.
 
Yeah, I'm far from an expert on graphics cards but it might be worth upgrading that. I've just bought an Nvidia GTX 460 and it plays the BF3 alpha on auto settings at 30-45fps average and it looks great. Cost £138 or so.
 
I hope the gun physics make it across from Bad Company 2, none of this MW2 or Black Ops rubbish of merely point and hold fire. Bad Company 2 requires you to learn how to use each weapon, features things like bullet drop over longer distances, and you really need to control the gun when firing or else it goes all over the place. The BF3 videos look a little worrying in this respect, the recoil seems a little bit like Medal of Honor, MW2 etc where you just pointed and held fire.

As for the versions, they'll probably be identical in all but graphics and player sizes. I actually prefer to play 24 players rather than 36, I think it makes it slightly more tactical. Bad Company 2 features 24 players and I love that game.
 
i would say pc specs are the way everyone guessed they could be, but i read that those who played alpha code said the game depends too much on dx11 gpu, which i find not that acceptable.

they should make this game run fine on dx9 and dx19 gpu's in final release.
 
wabak said:
NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS.

I'm lead to believe it's pretty terrible. and definitely dated.
Click to expand...

AAH i used to have that :), it's ok for PES, and just about plays F1 2010. But it's not a 'great' card.

Good for the price at the time though :)

I wonder if i can buy a quad core processor or do i have to buy a whole new PC? can i just replace the chip?

DagsJT said:
Yeah, I'm far from an expert on graphics cards but it might be worth upgrading that. I've just bought an Nvidia GTX 460 and it plays the BF3 alpha on auto settings at 30-45fps average and it looks great. Cost £138 or so.
Click to expand...

138 pounds, way, way out of my price range for a video card :LOL: I'm a cheap bastard when it comes to buying cards.
 
Feels a lot more fluid than BC2, nice animations and looks really good. The map kinda gets dull after playing a few times but I'm really excited about the other maps. The guns feel very good, not noticed any of the complaints that people are saying that there's no recoil?

Or so I hear...
 
Got my own invite to the Alpha trial today.
So currently downloading, was pretty pissed that I had to download Origin which is EA's version of steam which is really slow and clunky.

The download is only 3.2GB so probably only contains a few levels and small parts of the game.

I will let you know how the game runs on my machine.
Intel i7 2600k QC running at 5ghz.
ATI 5870.
8GB Ram.

But will be a day or two before I post initial impressions.

P.S. If you want to have a game my origin account name is bsmaff if you want to add me.
 
GPU is also important too, isn't it? I'm sure I've seen GPU benchmarks where ARMA II has been used.
 
LTFC said:
I hope the gun physics make it across from Bad Company 2, none of this MW2 or Black Ops rubbish of merely point and hold fire. Bad Company 2 requires you to learn how to use each weapon, features things like bullet drop over longer distances, and you really need to control the gun when firing or else it goes all over the place. The BF3 videos look a little worrying in this respect, the recoil seems a little bit like Medal of Honor, MW2 etc where you just pointed and held fire.

As for the versions, they'll probably be identical in all but graphics and player sizes. I actually prefer to play 24 players rather than 36, I think it makes it slightly more tactical. Bad Company 2 features 24 players and I love that game.
Click to expand...

My feelings/concerns too.

Strangely, I've lost a lot of interest in BF3. I'm sure that it will be great, but I'm also so contented with BC2 that I could happily keep on playing that for another year if BF3 turns out to be a brain-dead MW clone.
 
DagsJT said:
PC users, try going to:

https://bf3alpha.battlefield.com/

As some people are not being emailed keys but get a key when logging in. Not always successful and some suggesting it might depend on your previous Battlefield rank? Worth a try anyway.
Click to expand...

Anyone who has Veteran status higher than 2 are eligible for the beta, this is regardless if you played the game on pc or console. So you can guarantee there is alot of console gamer's with beta key's and they don't even know it.
 
DagsJT said:
Feels a lot more fluid than BC2, nice animations and looks really good. The map kinda gets dull after playing a few times but I'm really excited about the other maps. The guns feel very good, not noticed any of the complaints that people are saying that there's no recoil?

Or so I hear...
Click to expand...

i also heard this :CONFUSE: which is totally different from what i've read on other sites.

first it was written that it runs slower than bc2, now i read on several sites that it runs better than bc2.

i hope it stays that way.
 
DagsJT said:
GPU is also important too, isn't it? I'm sure I've seen GPU benchmarks where ARMA II has been used.
Click to expand...

Yea it does a bit but a 460 gtx compard to a 580gtx using same cpu will offer hardly any improvements

upgrade your cpu and it will make a noticably difference matey.

some pc games are cpu heavy
 
jaygrim said:
What has BC2 gotta do with anything? And Jonney fuck off with your ArmaII bollocks.
Click to expand...

Because BC3 is the next game in the series and follows on from BC2. Although Bad Company 2 isn't a direct sequel to BF2, it's by far the latest game and a fair few of us love it, so we understandably want BF3 to still have the same kind of 'feel' to it that makes the series so enjoyable.
 
Last edited:
DagsJT said:
Feels a lot more fluid than BC2, nice animations and looks really good. The map kinda gets dull after playing a few times but I'm really excited about the other maps. The guns feel very good, not noticed any of the complaints that people are saying that there's no recoil?

Or so I hear...
Click to expand...

Dags, so does recoil feel kind of similar to BC2? And is the game still essentially Battlefield? I'm a bit concerned it's been made more arcadey along the lines of MW2, Black Ops etc. What's your opinion? :)
 
From first impressions to me it seems alot more bad company than battlefield 2.
I only played it today for about 20 mins though on my laptop.

It seems to be quite well learning towards console gameplay from first impressions which seems to be the norm these days anyway.

I will play it some more tonight though and give it a good couple of hours but do bear in mind guys I did hate bad company 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom