We usually don’t go for the reverse ‘hype’ topics nor do we generally miscondone a game title, especially before it’s released, however in the case of the report on (site omitted), that’s exactly what they have done. (GamerID omitted) states his own opinion and has attempted to somewhat bash Battlefield 3, and here’s the excerpts for the 5 reasons they feel it’s not worth a purchase, and our 5 answers to why they are completely wrong.
(Update and retraction): It appears the original article has now been pulled but to the defense of the site itself, the (site omitted) contributor did say it was his own opinions and did not reflect the views of the overall site.
All that declared, here’s excerpts of what he said, and what we have to say. 
* Only runs at 30 frames per second
(gamerID omitted): It’s almost inexcusable for a game with a heavy competitive online focus to only give us a measly 30 frames per second.
GameGuideDog: Um, 30fps is realtime video. That’s the same rate we see things if we never blink.
* We’ve seen little to no console footage
(gamerID omitted): We are only a few months away from the release of Battlefield 3, yet we’ve seen absolutely no console footage from the Xbox 360 and only a brief couple of minutes of PlayStation 3 footage on the Jimmy Fallon show.
GameGuideDog: Again, what has been shown looked incredible, fun and awesome. Failed attempt #2.
* Vehicles
(gamerID omitted): I’ve never been a fan of games that had vehicles of mass destruction.
GameGuideDog: Then don’t play them.
*Only has 4 person squad based chat
(gamerID omitted): This is huge for me, I cannot stress enough how I feel about this. The game on consoles is only twelve versus twelve, so why don’t they implement a way to voice chat with your whole team?
GameGuideDog: Okay this is actually an almost decent complaint, however it probably has to do with talking to 12 people at once becoming as annoying as your first 3 complaints.
Battlefield 3 Screenshot
*What If Battlefield 3 is successful?
(gamerID omitted): There is a huge feud between Call Of Duty fans and people who frankly want Call Of Duty to die out or lose some of its luster. I think a lot of the people who are claiming that they will buy Battlefield 3 are mostly blowing smoke, but I wonder if Battlefield 3 is successful what that will mean?
GameGuideDog: After reading that last complaint 5 times, I still don’t see how or why this could be a complaint. It sounds more like you are extremely confused and need to get fragged a few times by GGD’s team when Battlefield 3 comes out and decide for yourself why you just suck.
Note that real-time video is 60FPS, not 30. There is an extremely significant difference between the two. Observe that Crysis 2 on consoles runs at 30FPS, while the CoD series runs at 60.
You seem to be confusing fields. There’s no such thing as 60i in regard to video games. Console or PC. In fact, unless you’re using some kind of extremely old display, nothing is interlaced natively. 1080i still exists, but that’s scaled from a native 720p image. Same goes for 480i in most cases.
I think both games are going to sell well but are going to fail quality wise. A modern FPS? NO WAY! Get out of here!!!
Like you, the only complaint that makes any sense is the last one about the voice chat. Even that though I don’t think carries much weight.
I play both CoD and Battlefield (BC2) and while full team chat in CoD might work fine, I think it would be disastrous in Battlefield. If you want to win a game in battlefield, you really do need to communicate. A lot. Even if it’s just me and one other person in my squad there is a constant back and forth on enemy positions, supply and well everything. Even more needed when piloting a vehicle with a friend.
With a full squad of 4 things can get a bit hectic, I can only imagine what it would be like with chat open to everyone on my team.
In call of Duty.. I might shout of an enemy position to a friend once in a while, but in general the game requires a lot less communication to be successful. so much so that most of the team chat is reserved for smack talking and general bitching.
So yeah. I like the squad based chat. That’s just my opinion though.
Mostly decent rebuttal, first point aside (which is really only valid for the console versions).
30fps isn’t as big a deal as it’s being made out to be, but the human eye can process MUCH faster than 30fps. The long-standing notion is that we see at 60fps, but due to the fact that displayed framerate, and our eyes aren’t in perfect sync, benefits can still be gained up to 90, or even 120fps.
That point doesn’t even factor in the fact that controls are significantly more responsive at higher framerates. Some games are barely playable due to poor input response. Killzone 2 is a fine example, and more recently from my personal experience, Test Drive Unlimited 2 is a much poorer experience on PS3 than it is on PC due solely to less framerate, and the input delay caused by it.
That said, I’m absolutely buying BF3.
Lol good on you for stating how completely biased their article was… Their article shows absolute CoD fanboyism whereas ur article is completely neutral.
Though every1 seems to be bashing Battlefield 3 for being only 30 fps, I would rather have 30 FPS of stunning realistic environments, destructions, buildings, etc than the rehased crap that CoD produces. Also for the people that are trolling/bashing at BF3 for 30 FPS how come your not complaining that ur favourite exclusives are 30 FPS huh? Uncharted 3, Killzone 3, Gears of War 3 are ALL 30 FPS.
one reason why its stopping me from getting this game is that I am positive the game will disconnect on me…AGAIN!
hahah then dont play them! lol that was freaking hilarious
Just to be noted, I absolutely loved COD. I like the responsive controls and the “arcade” feel to it. I love running and gunning more than tactical gameplay. With that being said, I have nothing bad to sad about BF3, I’m sure it will be a great game with impressive visuals regardless of what it is being played on. I can’t believe all the negativity coming from both sides of this argument. Bottom line is, who cares? If you think the other game is going to suck, then don’t play it. Everyone seems to just have a lot of time on their hands, so they come to the internet and bash each other’s games. Are we all really that immature that we end up bashing each other and what we like. Your opinion, along with mine, doesn’t matter in the end. Just have fun playing what you want to play!
this entire debate between the battlefield andw warfare fanboys is reaching glorious new heights of epic stupidity.
morons. utter morons, all of you.
mrzumm, it might be stupidity for entertainment purposes, but many of these folks are extremely intelligent.
“Vehicles in war are scary…I prefer to walk everywhere…”, -don’t let the tank hatch hit you on your way out you CoD gibblet-heads.
30fps is good if it does not drop at all… i played games at 120fps and having them drop even to 110 is extremely noticeable… point being it is all about being consistent.
hey GGD, we gonna need some strong strings to tie our eyelashes if we don’t gonna blink while doing some bang bang otherwise the enemies will bang us.
Neil