BF3 SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS
On April 7th, 2012 in Videos
The annual PAX video game convention is underway, and DICE is showcasing the upcoming Battlefield 3 DLC Close Quarters. Someone managed to sneak a few minutes of Close Quarters gameplay on one of the new maps, Ziba Tower. While the footage is not perfect (it’s off screen), it does show what the new DLC is all about: very tense, close quarter-based infantry combat. Fans of the Operation Metro map should be delighted.
im not really a fan of operation metro but this looks pretty good
this makes me wonder what the other maps are going to be…
Same here, im just glad its 8 on 8. Anything higher and the gameplay will be dreadful at least there wernt frag rounds or RPGs spamming in the gameplay
This looks ok and pretty balanced.
just wait until this goes live to the public…i guarantee you it will be shotguns and claymores for days.
lol every video bf3 blog posts gets taken off due to copyright issues or something
i downloaded it to my server the first day this got posted cause i knew it would get taken down haha.
Nuketower.
Yeah, lots of flanking routes. No clusterf*#k choke points.
looks good.
I will be buying the Dlc for the guns not for the maps. Yes they are bigger than i expected but i would much rather play armored kill.
I really hope they will release naval only map with 2 aircraft carriers and no surface combat someday. BTRs, boats and jets would be awesome. Tho it would need few battleships also.
LoL!
watched a certain movie with Rihanna in it?
There was a BF2 map made by fan featuring only two A/C carriers as you say. It was nuts ^^
That sounds pretty good. 1 aircraft carrier per team and 1 Destroyer per team(plus the landing craft on the carrier and the other boat things that transport tanks/armor to land like on karg island), plus a large chain of islands that either your teams’ jets can control the area like air superiority in battlefield 1943, or you can storm the islands with landing craft and take over 3 flags, plus spam the other team with shells from the destroyer!(that would be overkill ^_^) Not to mention, the ships would have to be sinkable.
Or like you said, no surface combat. 2 battleships/destroyers per team and 2 aircraft carrier’s per team. The jets could have a new weapon unlock also, like anti-ship missles.
Lol. sounds like a reasonable update for Wake Island.
Russia does not have aircraft carriers. Never herd them haveing one.They meby have one but russia is a country full of secrets. No one knows.
Admiral Kuznetsov (Адмирал Кузнецов) is still in the service.
Admiral Kuznetsov (Адмирал Кузнецов) is still in the service.
They sold one to China for Christ’s sake.
Midway on 1942 [Desert combat mod does it pretty well too]
how about an aircraft carrier next to a damaged aircraft carrier, the idea is one got damaged and the other is going to board (pirate style) to destroy intel (mcoms). They could open up a bunch of halls and rooms to get some infantry cqc but have vehicles outside, hell one boat could have giant holes blown in it to allow for choppers and jets to influence the infantry fight.
Sounds a lot like Coral Sea from 1942. Good times.
Having put my indignation away and accepted the fact that the series has changed I have to say it doesn’t look as small as I suspected. Look forward to seeing the other maps in the pack.
Maps look bigger thanks to being vertical. It’s basically two floor. That doubles the map size. Difference is that it is unusual way to increase map size for BF series.
Rush would be cool on multiple floors would remind me of a story I heard about red army troops holding up in a pretty big building in Stalingrad took the Germans I think a week to clear the building there were only a handful of red army troops and the Germans took heavy casualties sooo that being said not getting my hopes up cause I do think BF should be more open than inside a building but might be fun hope its not directed towards TDM gameplay
Pavlov’s House was the name. There was map for the Forgotten Hope mod in BF1942. It was pretty cool.
Best damn comment I’ve seen in a while. When I feel like playing battlefield 2 I just go and play BF2, when I feel like playing something different from anything seen before, I just play BF3.
BF3Blog: where no one gives a shit about NDAs and just posts stuff.
And don’t forget BF3Blog: “Link and steal other peoples videos without giving them credit so we can pretend like its ours and feign an exclusive”
Eh, what? They embedded the original video.
Now that I’ve seen this gameplay, my opinion on the DLC has changed. All those Screen shots and videos the release mad the maps look much smaller then it really is. If the other maps look even better then this I just might get it…
It remembers me a lot Crysis 2 for the “vertical” gameplay. Not a a BF expansion pack for sure, but we still got Armored Kill (and the already released B2K).
The maps look alright, I will probably try them a few times and go back to them a little afterwards but really; I just wanted to see the guns! I’ve no problem paying for the dlc just for the new weapons:D Im surprised they were not pre-unlocked for the event
“Fans of the Operation Metro map should be delighted”
I highly doubt this, all the fanboys of Metro just sit in one place spamming nades and 320.
This isn’t what this is gonna be like!
The fact that he ran circles around the map over the course of that video still doesn’t change my opinion on this dlc. Still looks exactly like cod (but with better destruction and all the good bf3 stuff). Maybe it they expanded the maps just a little bit more where it would still be close quarters combat but still bf3 bigger (i’m picturing a hair smaller than seine crossing conquest on xbox/ps3)
My opinion: ppl who say ”FUCK THIS SHIT THIS ISN’T BATTLEFIELD, FUCK EA THIS IS COD FUCK THAT FUCK THIS” .. Shut the fuck up? I don’t like cqc either, but Operation metro is great sometimes (conquest [xbox] just for killing time, but rush is ok) We should give battlefield a chance for this dlc. Mixing the great frostbite and close combat beside the epic battles. And what’s cool that this dlc contains new weapons which are pretty interesting and this new ‘HD Destruction’, however you don’t have to buy this dlc, if you don’t want to. Just wait for armored kill and don’t even notice this one, if you don’t want to even imagine to give a chance for it. I think that 15 euros here and there in six months for a great game isn’t much. Still waiting for the armored kill of course
*I was tired while writing this*
no one cares … i mean seriously , what about making bf maps>>??<< and not cod maps???
sorry but probably 90 percent of the people who complain about this use to be cod players, including myself and there is nothing wrong with that, it was never the “small” maps you complained about in call of duty? it was the bogus connection and horrific imbalance of weapons, the way i see it battlefield just got cod fired and is now taking its place.
Add to that, the part that most people hate are, the guys with sprint, with dual machine pistols running around the entire map for the whole match, knifeing you. The way this guy in the video is playing, it isn’t too far off.
Squad Rush would work perfect on these CQC maps. And Search and distroy would be a fun game mode on battlefield, but there has to be completely no hub. I want real with more real!
I agree squad rush would be a blast on this map.
I just wish they could make BC2 maps. Like Arica Harbor. This DLC still looks goo though!
after seeing this im alot more excited for this new map pack, wish it would come sooner than june tho
looks like fy_pool_day to me
Looks better than what I expected
wah wah wah this isnt battlefied wah wah wah its cod.
Don’t buy it dont play it see your whining heard.
The facts however speak for themselves people like metro so they are giving those fans more of what they like. Those that like bigger maps will get bigger maps too in the future why does battlefield have to remain the same why cant it evolve?
If I love CQ and battlefield shouldn’t I be able to play CQ in battlefield? If I love flying jets shouldn’t I be able to do that? Why is it such a big deal that the game is catering for all its fans?
Metro sucks and so will close quarters quit defending crap!
Yes, the facts do most certainly speak for themselves. Too bad this is not a case of merely “liking” a certain map. Metro is the most easily abused map for one thing and one thing only: spamming OP filth and boosting KD/SPM, which is the only cocksucking thing the casualized community for this watered-down twitch-fest of a game gives a flying fuck about.
It ain’t about winning, it’s not about objectives, it’s about KD. It isn’t even about fucking fun anymore (Oh, I like this certain weapon, therefore I shall use it). No. It’s about stats. Personal stats. Me-me-me, I-don’t-care-that-I-have-9700-kills-with-GunX-z0mfg-iiTz2beast-2-put-down… and metro is the best map to spam it.
So fuck you. You know nothing about BF if you’re defending this shit claiming “facts”.
too much whining, it’s called close quarters which means tighter spaces not tiny maps. sure they might be smaller than regular bf maps but they’re not near as small as any cod map. just stop complaining and give it a chance it looks sick if not just ignore it and wait for armored kill but just shut up and ignore it.
derp… according to Infinity Ward, and therefore DICE, close quarters=small maps. It isn’t nice, but for some reason it is all they understand.
More CQC please, throw the huge open vehicle maps away…..(sarcasim)
More HD destruction…
On Launch: Advanced Destruction
Back to Karkand: Enhanced Destruction
Close Encounters: HD Destruction
-.-
DICE stated that they did HD destruction in Close Quarters simply because they have less processor hungry things such as vehicles holding them back.
They could make HD destruction on every map no matter what the size, vehicles or not; but not everyone has a $3,000 computer. People running Battlefield on medium settings would most likely have to turn down their graphics, players with lower end PC’s probably wouldn’t be able to play at all (or at least have significant lag) until they upgrade. Not to mention consoles which still get some lag here and there would take a horrendous FPS drop if they were to make HD destruction on every map. (I’m not hating on consoles; I play on a console. But the fact remains DICE had to really push the hardware to get a minimum of 30 fps on consoles with BF3, and even then from time to time in some areas there is lag)
The “vanilla” maps in BF3 don’t have very good destruction. B2K has better destruction; but it’s not significant enough to put a huge load on someones processor.
My point being is that putting HD destruction in every map in the game would cause huge amounts of strain on processors. Consoles probably wouldn’t be able to even play the game comfortably anymore if it can run it at all, PC players with low end PC’s would probably have to upgrade, and players with higher to medium end PCs would have to lower their graphics significantly to retain their desired fps. Because of this, this is why DICE is putting the “HD destruction” in Close Quarters because it simply has less processor heavy things such as vehicles, and other things like map size.
This so-called “HD destruction” is just where your rifle bullets make concrete and plaster explode incredibly unrealistically when shot. Stop lauding it like it’s something to be proud of, I’d rather have bigger maps than explosions everywhere that don’t even make sense.
@ Anonymous
I never said I was praising the hd destruction. I think it is nice, but that’s completely besides my point.
My point is that HD destruction is simply processor heavy. Instead of 80% of the wall being blown up by one rocket, it’s now very small bits and pieces being taken out by bullets. That means more of load on processors. Applying this to a 64 / 24 player map is only going to put more of a strain on processors.
I wished they used Frostbite 1.5 and then added some improvements with consoles while PC gets 2.0 that way you don’t have the hectic of worrying about hardware limitations for consoles and you would get the best of both worlds for patches too. I’m an PS3 player and can see the flaws of the 2.0 engine on consoles and see the lag clearly and poor Anti-Aliasing,its ironic how AA supposed to prevent input lag but is the cause of it. I think BF3 should have been delayed,but i can talk about should,could and would all day and get nothing done but i hope they fix their game before completely moving onto Warfighter and Mirror’s Edge 2.
This doesnt look to be a clusterfuck like most people thought, because its 8v8. But doesnt it seem very slow paced with only 8 players?
YAAAAAWN
Im glad most of the rooms appear to have more than 1 or 2 entrances, unlike operation metro.But I still can see people crawling to camp or avoid the inevitable claymores at the top of the stairs.IDK, I’ll probably still buy it for the weapons.
It’s coming out on my birthday! ^_^
Nobody care.
Deal with it!
Seems like somebody had a lack of love during their childhood
It looks better than I thought it would be.. .but how many players were there? 4? This map would be good for 8-10 players but I can’t imagine 16+ people with floodlights on their guns…..
It looks really good with a SMALL player count. It doesn’t seem like BF at all… but reminds even more of Rogue Spear now.
Hopefully they fix the suppression before this comes out. If they don’t, the games will last forever because no one will be able to kill anybody…they’ll all be suppressing eachother
The suppression is annoying but at least you can get the suppression medals easly wich gives extra xp.
they have suppression backwards, if you’re being shot at first you’ll see blurry and get muscle tension(extra recoil and other such) then after 4 seconds you’ll get used to the fire and then becomes less effective,ask any Marine or any other Militant.