Give RPS a hit by checking out the story here.

64 players, prone, jets and other cool stuff already confirmed. Oddly it will have some kind of singleplayer component.

*insert whining about how DICE abandoned PC after cancelling Onslaught on Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 1943 here*

I'm sorry, is it me or are they proudly exclaiming "We didn't even remove any of the standard features of the previous game this time around"? Have PC games really fallen so far that that is an actual selling point? "Doesn't suck as much as most other sequels" seems like a really poor advertising slogan to me.

Seriously, an announcement of expected features, right after they tell us they've abandoned the PC by not even bringing us 1943?

This seems to be the prevailing reaction and I really don't get it. 1943 was a very stripped-down console port of a game we played 10 years ago, why does it matter really? It was also delayed so long that no one should have cared anymore.

Wishbone is right that 64 players, jets and prone should not be celebrated as much as expected, but this announcement is still exciting to me. I can't imagine being jaded enough to not be excited for Battlefield 3.

Given the state of PC games in recent years, that's not an unreasonable assumption. Lately, "multiplatform" has become almost synonymous with "developed for consoles, then ported (often badly) to the PC".

Not sure about "badly"... the PC version is still vastly superior 9 times out of 10.

I think different people have different standards though. Some people won't be happy unless the game feels like it was made solely for the PC while others just want to play the game and are happy it works as it should. I'm in between those two somewhere.

1943 sucked, I got it on sale for 5 bucks and regretted it. Not sure why anyone would want it on the PC.

I love BF, I absolutely love flying the helis, so if those make a come back I'll be a happy camper. Some naval love could be good too.

I own and played all the PC Battlefields and still to this date nothing has come closer to feeling like a real engagement to me than BF1942 64 player. The vehicles (land and sea based) not only provide an extra element of immersion, but also added many layers to the strategy involved when compared to other shooters in it's class like COD. COD seems to dump all their work on just the character aspect (perks,etc.) while leaving the game itself very one dimensional from a teamplay standpoint.

I hope they at least bring back the ability to boot up a local server to sandbox play. Of the hundreds of hrs I spent playing the BF series over the years, at least half of that time was spent playing around with vehicles, etc. in sandbox style.

For those interested in the history and features of the BF franchise here are all of their intros up to BF2142. The BF intros were designed to showcase each game's capabilities. All of the actions observed in the intros can be performed in game. The first game (1942) and it's expansion plus BFV used CG but there after (with BF2) machinima style intros that used "in game" rendering were utilized.

Battlefield 1942 Intro
Battlefield 1942: Secret Weapons of WWII Intro
Battlfield Vietnam Intro
Battlfield 2 Intro
Battlefield 2: Special Forces intro
Battlfield 2142 intro

Even in cases where nothing is sacrificed, some people still aren't happy. It's really quite annoying.

My favorite is when they complain about things missing which many PC exclusives back in the day didn't have, like say AA support. No One Lives Forever 2 freaking consul port WTF!

It's probably not as bad as all that either. A few notable cases have probably blackened the reputation of all PC ports. Gears of War and UT3 spring to mind.

Wait, isn't this the one with the broken multiplayer in the current version?