Squads could also be improved:- VoIP, friends list, in-game IM-client and “extensive clan support”
Have that information from the leaked info letter of bf3:- Squads and Commanders are present, introduced are “Battalions” which consist of three to four squads.
r xD Just imagine the gameplay... Tanks which could REALLY BLOW STUFF UP =) No hidding behind 2cm thinn metall walls 
[R-MOD]Brummy wrote:There are no plans yet for PR to move to BF3 anyway as far as I know.
^^^^I dunno why people would want to move to Bf3... the leaked info looks like they're doing another bF2142 and taking the players further down to a max of 48 players... a full 16 players (more than 1 squad per side) less!~ PR is moving towards epic gameplay, we don't need to be cutting back on player numbers
Tell me if i'm wrong, but i read "40 players on EACH side".Psyrus wrote:I dunno why people would want to move to Bf3... the leaked info looks like they're doing another bF2142 and taking the players further down to a max of 48 players... a full 16 players (more than 1 squad per side) less!~ PR is moving towards epic gameplay, we don't need to be cutting back on player numbers
My apologies, I'm very tired and fired off the post without double checking. 40 a side is in fact very good news, thanks for clarifyingFabryz wrote:Tell me if i'm wrong, but i read "40 players on EACH side".
That means 80 in total
btw i think i'll remain ALSO in PR.
It will ever be installed in my pc by default
listen dude I know what you mean but holy **** that was not the question!PFunk wrote:They don't release the source code for a few reasons. Number one is ideological. Companies are really kind of like perfect capitalists and that overriding psychology is rather sociopathic and fascist. They love control and they don't want to lose control of their intellectual property. Its funny cause in economics the fiscal conservatives love to tout the natural competitiveness of the capitalist free market but really the irony is that a successful capitalist venture leads to extreme conservatism (don't want to lose their established profit margins) and as a result they don't take risks (risks cost money and if it doesn't pan out it costs them more money... that means making less money actually but they view it as real money even if it isn't brought in yet). The second oddity of the result of a successful capitalist venture is that it tends to not only hate competition (competition is a threat to their existing profit margins) but as a result of self defense destroy it by several means. Which leads us to our second reason why they won't release the source code.
Competition. Why was a C&C Generals mod remaking Starcraft ordered to cease and desist? Why do most Stargate SG-1 mods get shut down also by MGM? Why did Ubisoft not release the source code to Silent Hunter 3 like it did for SH2?
Its a simple reason. They view mods as competition for their market base. Mods which improve their products actually attack their market share because it is feared it will inhibit the future sales of new releases which will ostensibly be meant to address the very issues that mods do.
Take Silent Hunter 3, a WW2 Atlantic U-boat sim. The biggest hurdle in modding that game is the lack of source code. But also the developers and publishers KNEW that all sim game communities are fanatic modders who are never happy with their own work let alone vanilla. So wouldn't an SDK improve sales? Not really when you consider the fact that the community of Silent Hunter 2 (the previous release) took that code and created a fully realized and amazingly well done mod called Pacific Aces, depicting life for the Silent Service in the Pacific Theatre. This was a threat to Ubisoft with SH3 because guess what the next game in the Silent Hunter series was... you guessed it; Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific. Any attempt to create a pacific mod, which inevitably would have happened, would have significantly hindered sales of an inferior one which, despite the increased numeral, was still made within the same slightly modified engine.
So you see its a paradox. The consumers which buy the product are inevitably, in their minds, the competition which keeps us from buying their next game cause we apparently make something better than they do and they're not willing to satiate us. I guess its kind of similar to why they've invented everlasting light bulbs but are never going to sell them.
There's a term in economics called planned obsolescence. Built in life of the product so that you have to buy a new one eventually. Why else are there ovens from the 20s still in rental homes working beautifully but anything you buy today at Sears breaks in less than 10 years?
Or as Chris Rock said once: "They're never gonna cure AIDS, cause there's no money in the cure. But they're make it manageable! In 50 years you are gonna be sayin' 'Damn! My AIDS is actin' up again!'"
TY2D2 wrote:I came to this thread to read about its topic, not BF3 being cool or not.
:/
BF2 uses the same engine as the new brand game, BF Heroes. They just keep on hard modding it, its like the golden goose for them.DICE gave out the source code to bf2, thinking it is useless today.
PFunk wrote:They don't release the source code for a few reasons. Number one is ideological. Companies are really kind of like perfect capitalists and that overriding psychology is rather sociopathic and fascist. They love control and they don't want to lose control of their intellectual property. Its funny cause in economics the fiscal conservatives love to tout the natural competitiveness of the capitalist free market but really the irony is that a successful capitalist venture leads to extreme conservatism (don't want to lose their established profit margins) and as a result they don't take risks (risks cost money and if it doesn't pan out it costs them more money... that means making less money actually but they view it as real money even if it isn't brought in yet). The second oddity of the result of a successful capitalist venture is that it tends to not only hate competition (competition is a threat to their existing profit margins) but as a result of self defense destroy it by several means. Which leads us to our second reason why they won't release the source code.
Competition. Why was a C&C Generals mod remaking Starcraft ordered to cease and desist? Why do most Stargate SG-1 mods get shut down also by MGM? Why did Ubisoft not release the source code to Silent Hunter 3 like it did for SH2?
Its a simple reason. They view mods as competition for their market base. Mods which improve their products actually attack their market share because it is feared it will inhibit the future sales of new releases which will ostensibly be meant to address the very issues that mods do.
Take Silent Hunter 3, a WW2 Atlantic U-boat sim. The biggest hurdle in modding that game is the lack of source code. But also the developers and publishers KNEW that all sim game communities are fanatic modders who are never happy with their own work let alone vanilla. So wouldn't an SDK improve sales? Not really when you consider the fact that the community of Silent Hunter 2 (the previous release) took that code and created a fully realized and amazingly well done mod called Pacific Aces, depicting life for the Silent Service in the Pacific Theatre. This was a threat to Ubisoft with SH3 because guess what the next game in the Silent Hunter series was... you guessed it; Silent Hunter 4: Wolves of the Pacific. Any attempt to create a pacific mod, which inevitably would have happened, would have significantly hindered sales of an inferior one which, despite the increased numeral, was still made within the same slightly modified engine.
So you see its a paradox. The consumers which buy the product are inevitably, in their minds, the competition which keeps us from buying their next game cause we apparently make something better than they do and they're not willing to satiate us. I guess its kind of similar to why they've invented everlasting light bulbs but are never going to sell them.
There's a term in economics called planned obsolescence. Built in life of the product so that you have to buy a new one eventually. Why else are there ovens from the 20s still in rental homes working beautifully but anything you buy today at Sears breaks in less than 10 years?
Or as Chris Rock said once: "They're never gonna cure AIDS, cause there's no money in the cure. But they're make it manageable! In 50 years you are gonna be sayin' 'Damn! My AIDS is actin' up again!'"
Hey thanks. The Chris Rock thing is referring to drug companies and how they aren't going to cure anything because they don't get a renewed prescription from a cure but a disease thats manageable thanks to their wonderful drugs has you buying hundreds of dollars worth of it a month.Mescaldrav wrote:Sweet post dude, every conceivable reason why they wont give out the source code. Didnt get the Chris Rock bit, but otherwise it sums it up nicely.....
I think its even more silly to make a decision to change to a new engine if we have basically zero information of its modding capabilities. BF2 mod support was bad. What makes people think its going to be any better in BF3? It may be a very good engine for the developers but that doesn’t mean much to the modders. If they lock everything with hardcoding or don’t provide any of their game editors its useless for us.nicoliani wrote:I wouldn't believe so. It would be silly to hang along a outdated engine when BF3 with Frostbyte DX comes out. Q is when it will come, my feeling is bad as there are so little info given out and no TBA. I think people will run away from BF2 and it's mods now when games like Mass Effect with stunning graphics are released, it just feels like playing a game that is ancient.
.
No.nicoliani wrote: Question is how long will it take for PR to be converted to the Frostbyte DX engine. Will it take some months or a year before we see PR on Frostbyte DX. If it takes long to convert will we have to wait before everything is done or will there be a one map release, at least so we can get a fast wrap of it?
