Your opinion on Close Quarters DLC?

[leepangfu]

Originally Posted by OLIVERMC97

Because that is what Battlefield has always been about, and what most long time BF fans want the maps to be like.

Every BF game I've played had a large community that only played infantry mode. It's just the obsession of the current BF3 community with hating CoD that thinks this is not what BF also is about. I will only get worried when they introduce killstreaks to BF.

[OLIVERMC97]

Originally Posted by leepangfu

Every BF game I've played had a large community that only played infantry mode. It's just the obsession of the current BF3 community with hating CoD that thinks this is not what BF also is about. I will only get worried when they introduce killstreaks to BF.

But still, big battles are what BF is known for, and what makes it stand out.

[AlphaCookie]

Hell the most popular map in Battlefield was Karkand, which was played in massive count on Infantry Only, because Karkand was to BF2 what Metro is to BF3. The map where you can rack up a lot of points and kills really fast.

As long as DICE has good spawning, which I'm confident they will since they designed these maps for close combat, and probably (hopefully) are testing the spawning since in a CQB map that is the single most important thing.

The fact that the player count is only 16 too tells me they are focused on the spawns, and decided they will only perform optimally with up to 16 players. I'd actually be more worried if they left the player count at 24.

If the spawning is good, I can already see a tagline for Close Quarters. Battlefield does Call of Duty, better than Call of Duty.

Like leepangfu said, I'll only worry if BF adds killstreaks.

[LeroySHANKTON]

I am very excited but my concern is the price. Will it be free for those with the pass thing? or will you have to pay for it even with or without the pass?

[leepangfu]

Originally Posted by OLIVERMC97

But still, big battles are what BF is known for, and what makes it stand out.

Yes but the problem with the big vehicle maps on console is that there are not much of those big battles. In BF1942 and BF:Vietnam(not the BC2 DLC) You sometimes had 3v3 tank battles. The only time I've been in a 3v3 tank battle in BF3 was when my team got spawnraped by three tanks on Op. Firestorm :P In maps like Caspian border on PS3 you only have to kill 1 or 2 enemies to capture a flag, sometimes even none. If you wanted to capture one of the two flags near the airfield on Invasion of the Phillipines in BF1942 you'd be lucky if you only needed to kill 5-10 to cap the flag.

Or a map like Omaha Beach where you needed to land on a beach with the enemy having the higher ground and machine guns and tanks and the only way up were two ramps on the side with clear view for the enemy. The biggest battles in BF3 on console are on Metro and Grand Bazaar. It may sound strange but the battles on that maps feel similar the most to the old games because you feel like you really need to battle to advance a bit. What we need is not only bigger maps with vehicles, but a larger player count aswell. Too bad that won't happen on the PS3

[WINAS3]

I think it looks pretty cool, nice and intense. Only I cant see myself shelling out 15$ for it so hopefully it's cheaper.

[I3oatsNHoes]

Personally I am kind of looking forward to this DLC just so I can get some new unlocks for my weapons quicker

[tomsinclair]

I'm looking forward to this DLC as I quite like the smaller maps on BF3 (Operation Metro, Grand Bazar) I like the close combat fighting style, not that I'm saying i hate the other maps cause they're fun too, but I'm really looking forward to this DLC!

[InternationalGamer]

Originally Posted by OLIVERMC97

Because that is what Battlefield has always been about, and what most long time BF fans want the maps to be like.

But, people seem to miss the point, this is DLC, it is optional, it is not actually in the game and taking up the space of potentially large maps, you cannot hate it because it's not truly Battlefield.

What's so wrong in having a bit of change, I doubt it will take over the true meaning of Battlefield with its full vehicular combat, but there's nothing wrong in adding this as a side.

[OLIVERMC97]

Originally Posted by InternationalGamer

But, people seem to miss the point, this is DLC, it is optional, it is not actually in the game and taking up the space of potentially large maps, you cannot hate it because it's not truly Battlefield.

What's so wrong in having a bit of change, I doubt it will take over the true meaning of Battlefield with its full vehicular combat, but there's nothing wrong in adding this as a side.

No but people are angry with Dice as they are wasting their time making maps some Battlefield fans don't want.