Switch Lights

The lights are on

DICE: Battlefield 3 Multiplayer Maps More Compact On Consoles

Battlefield 3 executive producer Patrick Bach recently discussed the concessions that needed to be made in order to get Battlefield 3's multiplayer running smoothly on home consoles.

Speaking with GameZone.de, Bach explained the decision to trim the multiplayer count for console versions of Battlefield 3 by pointing out what else would have to be cut from the game to support 64 players. "We tried to get more players in [to the console version] but then you need to scale down all the graphics, scale down all the destructibility, and sometimes you need to scale down all the map sizes. Everything is a compromise on: where do you cut?"

Reducing the max player count to 24 also cutting the size of some maps, but Bach was quick to point out that this will lead to more fun, not less. "When we say they are smaller, it's not that we have cut them in half. But we tried to compact them slightly to keep the action up. If you compare it to Battlefield: Bad Company 2, the maps weren't really small on console. We actually had huge maps even for console. We have the same kind of angle on it right now [in Battlefield 3]. We want to create the same experience for PC as for consoles."

While I would love to partake in 64-player battles on my 360 or PS3, the fact remains that 24 players is still more than most first-person shooters support, and DICE's Bad Company 2 had some of the largest multiplayer maps on consoles -- so don't let the news get you too upset.

[Translation via CVG]

Email the author , or follow on , , and .

Comments
  • Yea, I'm definitely going to have to pick up a copy for PC in addition to 360.
  • That's totally understandable. I'm fine with that, considering how consoles are lacking in power compared to the PC's of today. But Battlefield 3 is still going to be amazing!
  • I think I prefer this, it might be easier to come up with strategies.
  • I will be getting it for PS3 and also for PC. But this game is a good example of why next gen consoles are needed sooner than later. I hope they were able to balance out the player count with the map size for both. It must be hard
  • It's still gunna be pretty cool.

  • It makes sense because with 64 players in one map you would need a pretty big map. It's alright DICE, we still love you.
  • Yet another reason the PC version is going to be better...
  • Battlefield is always a joy to pick up and play, smaller map sizes and less people can actually make it a bit better, less of a hassle to traverse, and less assholes to deal with :P
  • I play Bad company 2 everyday, and i like this idea. There are some maps where I run for a while before I see an enemy. This should help keep the fighting more intense.
  • This is good.

  • I don't mind less players and smaller maps.  I'm sure it will do fine so long as it runs well.

  • An other reason to start sparing money and buy a good "nowdays beast". Playing on a PC will never cut in half your experience.
  • PC's getting all the love. But now they're saying, "Huzzah for whining!" But I don't care really. I'll be questing in Skyrim, XD.

  • So glad i invested in a BadA PC Got B3 skyrim and ME3 all coming to me for PC WEWT
  • This is actually good news. This means that both versions multiplayer will be completely then eachother.

    Huzzah!

  • thats fine with me i dant want bad graphics and i dont want technical hiv\ccups, all i want is fun, the story and scale, and good graphics even if they arent the best
  • It's so nice to see a developer making the best possible game they can make today, then scaling it back to get it to run on those 6 year old consoles instead of making one gimped version for everyone.
  • you know what actually I like this better cause it'll keep the snipers at bay and the action more intense

  • How is it that Kaos can make a game in 2008 on the Unreal 3 Engine (Frontlines: Fuel of War) that supports destruction 1.5, large vehicular warfare (with jets, jeeps, helis, tanks, APCs, and drone tech), and 50 players in one match. Then DICE who claims to have the most powerful game engine in the world can't even boost up console multiplayer to 32? Yeah Yeah Destruction 3.0 and all but if you compare the stats side by side between probably the most expensive game to make this year in comparison to a budget title in 2008, it doesn't seem to add up.
  • They are definitely shaking the DICE with BattleField 3.
1 2 3 4 5 Next ... Last