It appears that Dice is in fact working on BF3: 2142

eastcoasthandle · Post by **eastcoasthandle** » 2006-02-18 15:50

How will the modding community react to this? How will Dice's customers react to this?

Interesting find from another Forum
This will explain some oth the reasons why we have a sloppy 1.20 patch.
BF3: 2142

With the Battlefield franchise, EA and DICE have taken us from the trenches of WWII, passing through Vietnam War's fiercest battles and now into a fictional present warzone in Battlefield 2 for the PC and Battlefield 2 Modern Combat for consoles.

So, what could be the next logical step for the franchise? Past, present... you got it!

It seems the Battlefield franchise is about to enter a new era as it forwards in time to invade the frontlines of the future.

Speaking to Shacknews about the upcoming Battlefield 2 Modern Combat for the Xbox 360, senior producer Dan Blackstone hinted as what’s next for the franchise:

What can we expect for the future of the Battlefield franchise?

Dan Blackstone: We’re about to announce something very big, so stay tuned. One other interviewer asked this and I gave him a hint, so it’s only fair that I do the same for you: 3213/3X2. Or said another way: S.R. 4588164.

You didn’t see it yet? OK, here goes the math: (3213/3)x2= 2142. Then, S.R. stands for square root and if you calculate 4588164^1/2, you get 2142!

By now, it is pretty obvious that the next installment in the Battlefield series will take place in the year 2142 and unless there was a nuclear war in-between that left humanity only with stick and stones, you can expect futuristic warfare as it finest.

Does Epic Game’s Unreal Tournament series has anything to fear? We'll see soon.

http://forum.eagames.co.uk/viewtopic.ph ... sc&start=0 <---original thread, read it and please vote if you like the idea or not.
I mean someone help me understand something. How can they be making BF3 when BF2 is not complete? BF2 is still missing a fully functional, non beta map editor. Which we never received and, it's been nearly a year later. So how much of a game BF3 will be when that's release...guessing by spring? Lets see for $60 or 80 pounds? What will they think of next, make you pay for the game then make you pay for a 1 year online subscription to enter rank servers?

IS THIS OUR FUTURE from this company?

Gran · Post by **Gran** » 2006-02-18 17:21

Oh ****... I think I just crapped my shorts, threw up a little in my mouth, and saw my own death. 2142??!!?? WTF.

Noetheinner · Post by **Noetheinner** » 2006-02-18 17:25

gee and after bf2 was out for..... how long?

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2006-02-18 17:28

Dice blows

Post by **BlakeJr** » 2006-02-18 17:55

Cerberus wrote:Dice blows

They do???
Well, it's been said before and now I'm saying it too; If not for DICE we would not have a BF series of games and definitely not a Project Reality mod (technically it's still a minimod but...).

It is only natural that a big game company such as DICE are way ahead in their planning and development for future games. Be they a continuation of the BF series or another title altogether. They have also said that gamesupport is a whole different department within DICE that is in charge of developing patches for the games while the company gamegurus start working on the new project.
There is nothing weird about this and nothing ominous about it either. I doubt that neither DICE nor EA are about to turn their backs on BF2 in quite a while yet.
Why?
Simple. They are still making money of it!

Post by **Hitperson** » 2006-02-18 17:58

Cerberus wrote:Dice blows

them self.

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2006-02-18 19:09

Ive had the confirmed from a very reliable source, personally i have no interest way to sci fi for my tastes. im only interested in stuff set in present day or historically

Post by **Fullforce** » 2006-02-18 19:15

Man, 2142... I'll have to rename myself Fullforce Jnr. Jnr. Jnr.

Skullening.Chris · Post by **Skullening.Chris** » 2006-02-18 19:21

From what I hear, this isn't gonna be considered BF3, it's a transitional game like BFV was. There's a video of it at planetbattlefield, shows a pretty cool looking mech...

dawdler · Post by **dawdler** » 2006-02-18 19:24

If they keep it to logical future I think that's fine (think Ground Control style weaponry but without the aliens). Actually I think the video is showing great potential as a game.

Regarding the creation of this new game before BF2 is "complete", its a freakin game developer company. BF2 isnt the only game they are working on (Fun fact: DICE has made Barbie games). BF2142 (which is a pretty neat name, heh) was probably being planned before BF2 even went gold.

Post by **BlakeJr** » 2006-02-18 19:33

dawdler wrote:If they keep it to logical future I think that's fine (think Ground Control style weaponry but without the aliens). Actually I think the video is showing great potential as a game.

Regarding the creation of this new game before BF2 is "complete", its a freakin game developer company. BF2 isnt the only game they are working on (Fun fact: DICE has made Barbie games). BF2142 (which is a pretty neat name, heh) was probably being planned before BF2 even went gold.

My point exactly.

Figisaacnewton · Post by **Figisaacnewton** » 2006-02-18 19:51

Which is sad. I really hate EA. What happened to the good old days of gaming, where the great games were made FIRST, then published, not halfway finished and then rushed out the door?

Anyways, this looks retarded. The only scifi stuff that has EVER caught my interest has been StarWars, and lately, Firefly/Serenity doesn't seem too horrible either. Mechs? no, dumb. Not realistic fighting machines in concept. Too many weaknesses. Too complicated. Too big. Etc. How can you even have infantry in a game with Mechs in it?!?! You just get to run around, and get points for not being stepped on?!

I will only consider buying this game if it has great mods.

dawdler · Post by **dawdler** » 2006-02-18 20:27

Figisaacnewton wrote:Anyways, this looks retarded. The only scifi stuff that has EVER caught my interest has been StarWars, and lately, Firefly/Serenity doesn't seem too horrible either. Mechs? no, dumb. Not realistic fighting machines in concept. Too many weaknesses. Too complicated. Too big. Etc. How can you even have infantry in a game with Mechs in it?!?! You just get to run around, and get points for not being stepped on?!

That doesnt make any sense. How can you have infantry in a game with choppers and tanks? You'd think they get squished the second they spawn. But what do you know, BF1942 did it. BFV did. Hell even BF2 is doing it

I dissagree with the realism factor too. It may not be feasable today, but in the future? A mech type vehicle has its advantages if we assume that we have the technology to build it. It can go to a whole lot more places that tanks cant.

Although to be honest I think it would be more realistic and logical to have 4-legged mechs. It divides weight better (ie a bigger gun), can go areas the 2-legged mech cant without loosing stability and could still function with the loss of one leg. Not to mention it would be more agile in terms of ground clearance (getting up on two legs to peak over a building might be good

).

Cerberus · Post by **Cerberus** » 2006-02-18 21:07

Well, maybe this BF2142 **** will have a pretty sweet engine you guys could put PR2 on

lonelyjew · Post by **lonelyjew** » 2006-02-18 21:15

Bah, 2142, that's way too far into the future. That's 136 years from now, that far ahead I highly doubt we'de be using something as stupid as a mech and conventional guns. If you look back to 1870(130 years ago) that's when we just started to use rifles regularly in the military and when the first automatic guns first started to be used. The progress we've made since then is phenomenal and because the rate that progress increases itself increases over time.

If they do want to go that far into the future, they should really look into how millitary techonology has progressed and imagine what would exist 136 years from now rather than just saying "Oh, this would be cool" and adding in whatever popped into their little heads.

Skullening.Chris · Post by **Skullening.Chris** » 2006-02-18 21:38

Yeah, I agree about it being quite a bit too far into the future. BF2042 would be cooler cuz it'd be 100 years from 1942 instead of the random 200...

dawdler · Post by **dawdler** » 2006-02-18 21:41

lonelyjew wrote:Bah, 2142, that's way too far into the future. That's 136 years from now, that far ahead I highly doubt we'de be using something as stupid as a mech and conventional guns. If you look back to 1870(130 years ago) that's when we just started to use rifles regularly in the military and when the first automatic guns first started to be used. The progress we've made since then is phenomenal and because the rate that progress increases itself increases over time.

The progress isnt so phenomenal in terms of weaponry, really. We are mainly using the same type of weaponry designed in early 1900, just better materials, more streamlined and much higher quality. Remember the M1911? It was still in use by US armed forces not too many years ago!

Besides, who knows how many nuclear wars blasted us back to the renaissance between now and 2142?

Post by **UK_Force** » 2006-02-18 22:03

All Big companies look into the next design project as soon as one product goes to the production line - that is business guys ??

The point is - "customer after care", I am sure they will not turn their backs on BF2 yet as has already been said the money is still here. So calm down and let them do what they do - and in the meantime enjoy the product of BF2 ...... Project Reality !!!

Lets not have yet another EA/DICE argument, we are above that - it is so common now on every other BF2 forum !!

Post by **RikiRude** » 2006-02-18 22:03

Skullening.Chris wrote:Yeah, I agree about it being quite a bit too far into the future. BF2042 would be cooler cuz it'd be 100 years from 1942 instead of the random 200...

i would actually enjoy seeing a BF2042, well compared to 2142, because they can just take all the current military weapons we have now that are still undergoing testing and put them in the game.

F.N.G. · Post by **F.N.G.** » 2006-02-19 01:21

The truth is, that we don't know what will be around 136 years from now, so anything goes, really. You can't definately say that something will or will not be around.

This is uncharted and open to interpretation. We may hit a technological plataeu some time in the future and not really be able to advance so fast or we may find some insanely concentrated energy source that makes new things possible. Noone knows what the future will bring, or when it will be possible. That is what makes a futuristic setting so interesting. I like it and think that it is only as close minded as you make it. There are no rules on what can and can't be done, yet. Leave that to the past and present.

Hell, people thought we'd be flying around in cars and eating our meals in pill form, by now. LOL