Battlefield 4 multiplayer details emerge

DICE says Engineer, Recon, Support, and Assault kits will return with more specialization options; Field Upgrades will offer faster sprint speed, expanded ammo capacity.

In a blog post today, Battlefield 4 developer DICE shared new information about the game's multiplayer component.

First, the four playable kits from Battlefield 3 will return in Battlefield 4: Engineer, Recon, Support, and Assault. This time around, however, players will be able to "more strongly specialize" their role, as the game will cater to "different play styles."

More information will be shared in a follow-up blog post.

"Looking at Battlefield 3, I think only a fraction of our players have tried all available gadgets or vehicles in multiplayer," lead multiplayer designer Thomas Andersson said. "Of course you don't have to use everything in the game, but I think we can do a better job in BF4 of letting players make more educated choices in their kit loadouts and combat roles."

Andersson said in Battlefield 3, some players stuck with the default Assault loadout. While there is nothing wrong with this, he said, they are also missing out on "so much amazing variety."

"In Battlefield 4, we're clearly displaying what gadgets can do for you, how different weapons compare, and how they affect your options on the battlefield," he said.

Andersson also revealed a new concept for Battlefield 4 called Field Upgrades.

"If you're a long-term fan that played Battlefield 2142, you will already have an idea what these are, but we have tweaked them for Battlefield 4," Andersson said.

Field Upgrades are chained boosts that can affect gameplay mechanics, Andersson said. Similar to specializations in Battlefield 3, these Field Upgrades can provide players with faster sprint speed, stronger personal armor, or expanded ammo capacity.

"The idea behind Field Upgrades is to give individual rewards for squad based team play performance. You earn them through squad scoring such as squad healing, completing objectives with your squad members, squad resupplies, squad repairs, and other squad actions," Andersson said.

Ultimately, Battlefield 4's multiplayer mode has been designed as an open-ended experience that DICE hopes players will take full advantage of, Andersson said.

"If there is one thing I wanted to focus on for multiplayer in Battlefield 4, it's the idea of an open-ended design," he said. "We are creating a dynamic and complex 'sandbox' where you decide what you want to do with it. That’s an emergent type of gameplay that we pride ourselves upon here at DICE."

Battlefield 4 launches for Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and PC on October 29. Versions for Xbox One and PlayStation 4 are also in development.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Did you enjoy this article?

Sign In to Upvote

eddienoteddy

Eddie Makuch

Eddie Makuch is a news editor at GameSpot, and would like to see the Whalers return to Hartford.
Battlefield 4

Battlefield 4

Follow
409 comments
scatterbrain007
scatterbrain007

I'm still having lots of fun with Bad Company 2.  They're going to have to design a sequel above and beyond BC2.  The only multiplayer map I've gotten tired of and don't really enjoy playing is Arica Harbour. That's really only because of personal preference, I never really liked that map very much.  Before I even think of buying this iteration I'm going to have to see lots of game play.

Matcam89
Matcam89

It would be nice if you could customize your own character. Not just his weapons.

Grenadeh
Grenadeh

The only real change that needs to be made is the removal of client side hit detection and the de-pussification of hardcore. If you get hit once in hardcore, you need to die, Because of hit detect and nerfed guns, I've seen people hit and hit people myself in the face with rockets, shot someone 6 times point-blank with DAO12 and various other bullshittieries - like a tank shell exploding 4 feet from their legs - and people have survived.

stealthyninja81
stealthyninja81

@Grenadeh sorry but I don't think its possible to have Frostbite without client side. however, it is possible to have non-shit client side hit registration.

monkeypukefight
monkeypukefight

@Grenadeh LOL, yeah i love it when i blast someones legs away with a tankshell, but somehow they survive... 

Grenadeh
Grenadeh

There is in fact everything wrong with the default assault loadout. Level 100s running around with M16A3 are bitches and should be banned from Battlelog. The gun was meant to be for noobs and it is COMPLETELY OVERPOWERED because of it.

Speranza318
Speranza318

Did they fix hit detection in BF 4?  From the look of the gameplay videos, nope.


New shiny graphics and same gameplay problems = BF 3.5

Grenadeh
Grenadeh

@Speranza318 Yea unfortunately my clan is going to play BF4 and unfortunately i'm the BF chapter head so I'm going to have to play this 3.5 shit with the same god awful client side hit detection.

Matcam89
Matcam89

@Grenadeh @Speranza318  From what i understand after an interview with one of the creators, was that they messed with the settings so that people wouldn't die so quickly and probably gave the squad they were following alot of power. For E3 demo purposes.

ACWH
ACWH

Sort the problems out with dodgy admins on servers, the lack of 'vanilla' servers and be upfront with Premium instead of making people wait a year and then I'll buy a copy

TheSledRammer
TheSledRammer

Wow battlefield is just like cod, boring and milked dry. People that play this and criticize cod are hypocrites as the games are basically the same.

arqe
arqe

@TheSledRammer Troll alert.

Also i play both of them and got 500hours on CoD:BO2 Multiplayer on Steam.Play it only when we are full team - Hardcore Capture the Flag.But nothing else. CoD is boring if you dont have team vs team. Public games are like joke.

But Battlefield on the other hand is better in every aspect.You can play "Killer" Public matches.I dont know if its just me but i did find probably the best Public games on BF. Everyone working together. Even in 32vs32 games. They play for the objective defensive teams got rusher Recon's that prevent enemy to come close , Attackers with actually pushing tactically.Im a bit lucky i guess.

LS-Chaos
LS-Chaos

@TheSledRammer I enjoy both and I still have to disagree that they're the same in anyway. I actually think they're totally different and people need to stop comparing them. 

djpetitte
djpetitte

@TheSledRammer 

You aren't a very savvy gamer at all are you?  Your comment makes you seem really dumb, what from this article makes BF just like Cod?  The game play is completely different, cod doesn't even have classes nor has it ever had squad or squad points.   If anything its the other way around consider Dices, BF has been doing it longer. Nice try, troll.

Grenadeh
Grenadeh

@djpetitte I love the ignorant people who have played neither game or understand neither game saying "it's not at all the same, you're a troll."

I'm a CoD veteran, I've been in a CoD clan since  CoD2. I'm a BF veteran, I've played BF and have been in clans since BF1942 - a year before CoD ever game out.

While BF has vehicles, and destructible (kind of) environments, and CoD does not, the games are essentially the same. When you shoot people, they don't die. Whether it's because of shitty client side hit detect, their ping that's too high to be playing games in the first place, or because of badly designed guns and their damage, the game is the same. You shoot people, and they're supposed to die. BF expands upon this with bigger maps and vehicles and very horrible ballistics, but the same people play the games the same way.

They choose the overpowered guns/vehicles, and they camp, and they play like little bitches - regardless of game mode.

And yes CoD does have classes, they are called loadouts, and they have as little effect on differentiating people as classes in BF do.

Gazdakka
Gazdakka

@TheSledRammer Rubbish.

Maybe if you play nothing but Gun Master and Deathmatches then sure, it feels like CoD. But the staple Conquest game mode does not. CoD Domination has people running in and out all over the bloody map with virtually no frontlines at all, rewarding the individual with absurdly destructive weaponry for dismal killstreaks.


Conquest, in my experience, typically involves one side locking heads with another over a stretch of terrain with frontlines that aren't so spastically checkered as CoD's. You know, a bit more like a *battlefield*. And the only rewards you get are those you pick off a corpse or step into the driver's seat for. No commanders saying, "Congratulations! You killed 25 people, guess you deserve a nuclear bomb, soldier!"

But I digress, part of it depends on the map. Operation Metro and Grand Bazaar were reminiscent of CoD, but get into Caspian Border or Noshahr Canals and it's a completely different story. Even Arica Harbour from Bad Company 2 felt nothing like CoD even with virtually no vehicles. Let's also remember that Batlefield's graphics engine has changed several times, whereas CoD remained the same since 2007.

And unlike CoD, Battlefield titles tend to last at least 2-3 years, and since Bad Company 2 have had WAY better and longer-lasting DLC offers.

So no, it's not hypocritical to criticise CoD. Maybe if Actvision stopped cashing in annually for mediocre upgrades, then there wouldn't be so much levelled against them, eh?

godofwarbfcodfa
godofwarbfcodfa

sadly enough im tired of all the bf style gameplay it looks the same just with bigger things to destroy (correct me if im wrong of course) and slightly better graphics

LS-Chaos
LS-Chaos

@godofwarbfcodfa Yes it is sad they chose to keep some of the same designs for guns cause I think that's the biggest reason people say it's 3.5 if not the only reason. But hearing some of the stuff they're doing I do think it is a sequel worth playing, for me that is. 

arqe
arqe

@godofwarbfcodfa What you want from "Military FPS" ? What is wrong with him. Its like complaining about Fifa - Madde - NBA , Racing games.

What do you expect ? Its Military shooter and they all will look alike. Only difference is the quality of graphics , gameplay , physics.

Grenadeh
Grenadeh

@LS-Chaos @godofwarbfcodfa If they knew what was good for them they'd have made Battlefield 1944 or Battlefield 2143. People don't want this modern combat shit, it's always the same.

Gazdakka
Gazdakka

@Grenadeh @LS-Chaos @godofwarbfcodfa  Apparently, they do.  CoD keeps shelling out "modern" combat and it sells like hotcakes. Ghosts is going to be pretty much the same I'd wager, because a remote control dog isn't particularly futuristic, but rather a gimmick to sell the "modern" combat a 4th time.

ender707
ender707

The only question that matters: Will we be able to play on DICE servers?


...BANNED! :(

Monsterkillah
Monsterkillah

X1 is the definitife console version, but based on pre orders PS4 seems like to have biggest online community among three platform

I hope they implement some cross multiplayer between PC PS4 and X1

whitechapel34
whitechapel34

@Monsterkillah Agreed. If not cross platform amongst the next gen consoles, at least PS3-PS4 and Xbox 360-X1 cross plat would be nice

NightDrifter05
NightDrifter05

@Monsterkillah You don't want that, the last time a FPS tried cross play between PC and console's it didn't go well for console players since they basically got slaughtered by mouse/keyboard players. If they do make it cross play it need's to be it's own special mode.

Grenadeh
Grenadeh

@Monsterkillah I don't understand why you guys keep asking for this. You do realize that if you get cross-plat with PC, we are going to rape you until you ragequit every single time?