Battlefield 4 thoughts

  • 147 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by BigBangTheory_ (183 posts) -

Anyone else thinks it looks boring and really just another DLC?

I dont know Y are U so hyped on the gameplay

just a boring cinematic graphic presantnation . looks exactly like BF3

I think I expected too much.

Just work on another DLC for BF3 and wait with BF4 till U really have an idea of what youre gonna do with it

#2 Posted by blangenakker (2220 posts) -
Looks pretty boring to me too. sigh, another franchise EA is milking and the devs are bending over for them
#3 Posted by JigglyWiggly_ (23459 posts) -
it looks the same sp will be bad multiplayer will be unchanged mainly, which is exactly how I want it.
#4 Posted by BigBangTheory_ (183 posts) -

it looks the same sp will be bad multiplayer will be unchanged mainly, which is exactly how I want it.JigglyWiggly_

I dont see the MP changing other than new maps or bigger maps... = another BF3's DLC

#5 Posted by Grey_Eyed_Elf (3693 posts) -
Milking... Nothing more. The single player demo LOOKS amazing but it looks like a regular military campaign and I'm sure once we see the multi-player we might get more hyped but I'm sure its nothing that could have been added to BF3 as a map pack. Overall disappointing.
#6 Posted by DanielDust (15402 posts) -
Disgusting, just like BF 3, this time I'm not falling for the hype of others even if they praise it around this forum like "the most epicest of the epic of awesomest of teh ever after", BF 3 was sht, their DLC scheme was sht and this game and every shooter DICE will make will be sht, I'm waiting for a series DICE didn't destroy yet with their terrible ideas, terrible gameplay, terrible DLCs (that they seem to get away with unlike the CoD series), but most important of all, terrible support, they make the games worse with every patch and that series is Mirror's Edge, hopefully they make something with it soon.
#7 Posted by Assimilat0r (745 posts) -

Boring, generic, ugly , expensive, bad quality , low story line,  over hyped.  It is same as every new part of Call of Duty.   Pathetic, cuz there is a pritty big market for people who are dumb enough to buy that games and play.

#8 Posted by Iantheone (8242 posts) -
[QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] multiplayer will be unchanged mainly, which is exactly how I want it.

Cept it needs server side hit detection, voip and commander. Then its perfect
#9 Posted by MacBoomStick (1948 posts) -
[QUOTE="Iantheone"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] multiplayer will be unchanged mainly, which is exactly how I want it.

Cept it needs server side hit detection, voip and commander. Then its perfect

And bigger squads and mod support and bigger maps where the flags aren't all in the middle.
#10 Posted by Iantheone (8242 posts) -
[QUOTE="MacBoomStick"][QUOTE="Iantheone"][QUOTE="JigglyWiggly_"] multiplayer will be unchanged mainly, which is exactly how I want it.

Cept it needs server side hit detection, voip and commander. Then its perfect

And bigger squads and mod support and bigger maps where the flags aren't all in the middle.

Don't really see the need for bigger squads, but being able to decide for ourselves would be nice. Mod support would be nice too,but I dont see it happening.
#11 Posted by slabber44 (978 posts) -
Rinse and repeat! "YAWN". Next!
#12 Posted by PernicioEnigma (5281 posts) -
I want DICE to make another Rally Sport Challenge on the Frostbyte 2 engine and bring it to PC. Enough of this stuff.
#13 Posted by trastamad03 (4852 posts) -

BC2 like destruction is back, that's good. I liked the swapping of the sights (a la MoH). I wish it used the FC3 cover-lean system. Didn't notice much of a visual improvement, maybe tweaks here and there with additional particles and what not. The squad ordering didn't really impress me that much... Brothers in Arms did a better job than this.

 

I'll wait for it to get on special to even bother with it. Not gonna pre-order. Also Premium Edition of it is already confirmed (if you pre-order, you get it).

 

Also wanted to add, whoever was playing must have excelled in the Stormtrooper Aiming School.

#14 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

Looks great. I see a lot of great changes they are making to the campaign. I'm excited.

Multiplayer should be revealed at E3. I'm looking forward to it.

#15 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

Boring, generic, ugly , expensive, bad quality , low story line,  over hyped.  It is same as every new part of Call of Duty.   Pathetic, cuz there is a pritty big market for people who are dumb enough to buy that games and play.

Assimilat0r

Exactly what do you want out of video games? Seriously. This kind of cynical attitude is nothing but toxic.

 

#16 Posted by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

The graphics look very nice but it looks canned and boring to me. I won't be buying this one considering my disdain for EA/DICE, they don't deserve my money. I'll wait for some Arma III expansions or something, they're a FAR more deserving developer! :lol:

#17 Posted by Postmortem123 (7640 posts) -

Looks good, I'll be buying it.

#18 Posted by Basinboy (11053 posts) -

Visuals: impressive

Gameplay: unchanged

BF is a franchise for online play.  SP will likely be a joke, just as BF3 was, but you're doing it wrong if that's what you turn to Battlefield for.

#19 Posted by soolkiki (1744 posts) -

This is when I will wait for the game to come down in price and then enjoy it. If they honestly think I am going to pay $60 for what looks like an add-on, they will have to think again.

#20 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

Though I saw more sandbox elements, I'm hoping that this particular level was shown becuase it is a bit more scripted and thus easier to show off. If the whole game is so scripted, it's going to fall into the same trap that BF3 did. 

Though I do like how you can get in and out of vehicles. Couldn't do that in the BF3 single player and that alone could open up a ton of options. We'll have to see.

I'm staying cautiously optimistic.

#21 Posted by soolkiki (1744 posts) -

 

Also wanted to add, whoever was playing must have excelled in the Stormtrooper Aiming School.

trastamad03

That is EXACTLY what I was thinking!

#22 Posted by BSC14 (3657 posts) -

Boring, generic, ugly , expensive, bad quality , low story line, over hyped. It is same as every new part of Call of Duty. Pathetic, cuz there is a pritty big market for people who are dumb enough to buy that games and play.

Assimilat0r

Worst post I have ever seen. You can tell from a short gameplay clip & trailer that it has a "low story line" and it's "boring and generic"?

Wow....that's amazing.

And saying it's "ugly and low quality" just tops it off when it's probably the best looking game shown to date.

If you said "it does nothing for me" then i would not say a word but...yeah.

Terrible....terrible post.

#23 Posted by Rattlesnake_8 (18360 posts) -
I can't wait, looks awesome!! I just hope the campaign is a good length.
#24 Posted by soolkiki (1744 posts) -

[QUOTE="Assimilat0r"]

Boring, generic, ugly , expensive, bad quality , low story line, over hyped. It is same as every new part of Call of Duty. Pathetic, cuz there is a pritty big market for people who are dumb enough to buy that games and play.

BSC14

Worst post I have ever seen. You can tell from a short gameplay clip & trailer that it has a "low story line" and it's "boring and generic"?

Wow....that's amazing.

And saying it's "ugly and low quality" just tops it off when it's probably the best looking game shown to date.

If you said "it does nothing for me" then i would not say a word but...yeah.

Terrible....terrible post.

I think the poor troll was getting lonely and wanted to vent about how much his life sucks. It didn't work.

#25 Posted by BSC14 (3657 posts) -

[QUOTE="BSC14"]

[QUOTE="Assimilat0r"]

Boring, generic, ugly , expensive, bad quality , low story line, over hyped. It is same as every new part of Call of Duty. Pathetic, cuz there is a pritty big market for people who are dumb enough to buy that games and play.

soolkiki

Worst post I have ever seen. You can tell from a short gameplay clip & trailer that it has a "low story line" and it's "boring and generic"?

Wow....that's amazing.

And saying it's "ugly and low quality" just tops it off when it's probably the best looking game shown to date.

If you said "it does nothing for me" then i would not say a word but...yeah.

Terrible....terrible post.

I think the poor troll was getting lonely and wanted to vent about how much his life sucks. It didn't work.

Well again, nothing wrong with not being interested in it but ugly and low quality? That's just...biased hate or something.

#26 Posted by lextehrex (16 posts) -

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

#27 Posted by soolkiki (1744 posts) -

[QUOTE="soolkiki"]

[QUOTE="BSC14"]

Worst post I have ever seen. You can tell from a short gameplay clip & trailer that it has a "low story line" and it's "boring and generic"?

Wow....that's amazing.

And saying it's "ugly and low quality" just tops it off when it's probably the best looking game shown to date.

If you said "it does nothing for me" then i would not say a word but...yeah.

Terrible....terrible post.

BSC14

I think the poor troll was getting lonely and wanted to vent about how much his life sucks. It didn't work.

Well again, nothing wrong with not being interested in it but ugly and low quality? That's just...biased hate or something.

Exactly...sounds like one of my friends. He won't touch a game that's battlefield because it's not COD. Ticks me off. haha

EDIT: Also, I wasn't calling you a troll haha I was targeting the original post that you were responding to. :P 

#28 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

lextehrex

More time inbetween isn't going to necessarily make a better game. 2 years in between titles is plenty of time. A lot can change in just a few years.

#29 Posted by BSC14 (3657 posts) -

[QUOTE="lextehrex"]

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

Wasdie

More time inbetween isn't going to necessarily make a better game. 2 years in between titles is plenty of time. A lot can change in just a few years.

Agree...I don't care if they put one out every 6 months if it's quality.

#30 Posted by BSC14 (3657 posts) -

[QUOTE="BSC14"]

[QUOTE="soolkiki"]I think the poor troll was getting lonely and wanted to vent about how much his life sucks. It didn't work.

soolkiki

Well again, nothing wrong with not being interested in it but ugly and low quality? That's just...biased hate or something.

Exactly...sounds like one of my friends. He won't touch a game that's battlefield because it's not COD. Ticks me off. haha

EDIT: Also, I wasn't calling you a troll haha I was targeting the original post that you were responding to. :P

I know.. :) I didnt take it that way.

#31 Posted by soolkiki (1744 posts) -

[QUOTE="lextehrex"]

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

Wasdie

More time inbetween isn't going to necessarily make a better game. 2 years in between titles is plenty of time. A lot can change in just a few years.

This is true, but it gives us more time to enjoy what's already out. I only recently got BF3 (Due to not having a computer before) and It irks me slightly that they release it so soon. I won't hold it against them, but I would hate to see the server populations migrate...

#32 Posted by soolkiki (1744 posts) -

[QUOTE="soolkiki"]

[QUOTE="BSC14"]

Well again, nothing wrong with not being interested in it but ugly and low quality? That's just...biased hate or something.

BSC14

Exactly...sounds like one of my friends. He won't touch a game that's battlefield because it's not COD. Ticks me off. haha

EDIT: Also, I wasn't calling you a troll haha I was targeting the original post that you were responding to. :P

I know.. :) I didnt take it that way.

haha alright :)

#33 Posted by lextehrex (16 posts) -

[QUOTE="lextehrex"]

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

Wasdie

More time inbetween isn't going to necessarily make a better game. 2 years in between titles is plenty of time. A lot can change in just a few years.

I'm not saying anything about the quality of the game. 2 years is plenty of time with the teams they have. I'm just saying there's not really much point in releasing it so soon. Why not concentrate not on more of the same, but more things that will improve and enhance an FPS.

#34 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="lextehrex"]

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

soolkiki

More time inbetween isn't going to necessarily make a better game. 2 years in between titles is plenty of time. A lot can change in just a few years.

This is true, but it gives us more time to enjoy what's already out. I only recently got BF3 (Due to not having a computer before) and It irks me slightly that they release it so soon. I won't hold it against them, but I would hate to see the server populations migrate...

Well this is where it becomes all relative. I've been enjoying BF3 since 2011, I'm ready for a sequel. While I understand your concerns, it's not really something that EA and DICE can take into account that much. They had millions of sales on launch and in the early part of 2012. 

#35 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="lextehrex"]

Does look good but not sure why they're releasing so soon after BF3. The gap between 2 and 3 was 6 years! It made it so that when I got my copy of BF3, I was so excited to play it, and still am to this date. I'd release it next year at least, to give the franchise that anticipation which is has had since 1942. Releasing it this year just seems to be a way of rolling something new out to get more cash rolling in.

lextehrex

More time inbetween isn't going to necessarily make a better game. 2 years in between titles is plenty of time. A lot can change in just a few years.

I'm not saying anything about the quality of the game. 2 years is plenty of time with the teams they have. I'm just saying there's not really much point in releasing it so soon. Why not concentrate not on more of the same, but more things that will improve and enhance an FPS.

Well in this case it's probably because EA does want to milk the cash cow. They saw how well BF3 did and decided that it's logical to milk it. I'm not denying that at all.

Even if it is more milkage of a series doesn't mean it's going to be a bad game. The rumors so far have been true about the game so it looks like BF4 is going to be a substantial improvement of BF3 in pretty much every way possible. 

DICE keeps hinting at 2143 in the BF3 DLCs so I wouldn't be suprised if they are also working on that or at least have plans for something like that.

I'm sure with a change of the CEO that the direction of EA may change a bit and they may be more open to risks. BF4 development started well before the CEO of EA stepped down so they probably figured they should just finish it up first.

#36 Posted by Gamesterpheonix (3517 posts) -
I will admit that the games detail is insane. The increase is amazing and apparent BUT it does look a lot like BF3. You do see the better animations and the better fidelity with the particles but why not try to give the game a better if not futuristic (setting-wise) look? Now, in terms of the single player - Im actually kind of enticed. They seem to be taking a more personal approach with 4ish main characters and new mechanics such as a squad system. It doesnt look like its up to par with say "Brothers in Arms" which was amazing in so many aspects but it does have the squad command feature and I really like that. The story also seems a bit more thought out and grizzly. This time its an attack by the US on China and they dont seem to be playing it safe. I like that.
#37 Posted by xLittlekillx (1805 posts) -

I think they should get rid of the single player campaign that nobody cares about and put in offline botmatches which at least one person would care about.

#38 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

I think they should get rid of the single player campaign that nobody cares about and put in offline botmatches which at least one person would care about.

xLittlekillx

Aren't you generalizing a bit?

#39 Posted by James161324 (8315 posts) -

It looks pretty, but from what i have seen it seems where it ends. It looks like bf3.5 

#40 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

It looks pretty, but from what i have seen it seems where it ends. It looks like bf3.5 

James161324

Everybody keeps saying that without actually saying what they were expecting for BF4.

Seriously. What are sequels if they aren't new versions of the previous game? Do you want them to reinvent the wheel each release?

#41 Posted by ultimate-k (2348 posts) -

Its an expansion pack for BF3, but with better graphics. BF3 could last for another 3 years if it was supported but no a new Battlefield with the same god dam setting is here.

#42 Posted by TwistedShade (3149 posts) -

I really wish they would have changed the gun sound's. Annoys the hell out of me that they sound exactly like BF3.

#43 Posted by bussinrounds (2025 posts) -

BF is too close to CoD.  If I were to get any modern military shooter, it would be Arma 3.  But I doubt my steam powered PC could handle it regardless.

#44 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

I really wish they would have changed the gun sound's. Annoys the hell out of me that they sound exactly like BF3.

TwistedShade

Why would they change how the gun sounds? If it's the same gun, it should sound the same. It would be wierd if it sounded different.

They didn't studio produce the audio like in CoD, they actually recorded every gun sound in the game from the real weapon being fired. You don't get any better than that.

#45 Posted by Deadpool-n (467 posts) -

Ok, I think most of you are exaggerating when you say it looks bad. Just because it is similar to the last game doesn't mean it's ugly and terrible.

It looks pretty good, I'm excited to play the single player as well as the multiplayer. However, I do not want them releasing a new one every year. I will stop buying after 4 if they start what COD has been doing for years.

#46 Posted by BSC14 (3657 posts) -

Someone please find a better looking game. Any game....any platform. These are the best graphics I have ever seen...if someone can find better I would love to see it because I must have missed something.

#47 Posted by Assimilat0r (745 posts) -

[QUOTE="Assimilat0r"]

Boring, generic, ugly , expensive, bad quality , low story line,  over hyped.  It is same as every new part of Call of Duty.   Pathetic, cuz there is a pritty big market for people who are dumb enough to buy that games and play.

Wasdie

Exactly what do you want out of video games? Seriously. This kind of cynical attitude is nothing but toxic.

 

 

I just want something new, not a generic parts of every possobile shooter. It is kinda toxic behavior, But thing which bother me in BF / CoD is that we get always so high price for same generic games, look at Counter Strike Global Offense  it is generic and same as Source but realise price was like 10 $.

#48 Posted by slabber44 (978 posts) -

Its an expansion pack for BF3, but with better graphics. BF3 could last for another 3 years if it was supported but no a new Battlefield with the same god dam setting is here.

ultimate-k

^THIS^

I just don't get why they just can't support their games for more than 1 year! This is why I can't stand BF and CoD series, but as long as everyone keeps jumping on every new release it will never change. Don't complain after release if it's more of same ole stuff.

#49 Posted by Wasdie (49626 posts) -

I just don't get why they just can't support their games for more than 1 year! This is why I can't stand BF and CoD series, but as long as everyone keeps jumping on every new release it will never change. Don't complain after release if it's more of same ole stuff.

slabber44

For more than one year? By the time BF4 comes it BF3 will be 2 years old.

 

 

I just want something new, not a generic parts of every possobile shooter. It is kinda toxic behavior, But thing which bother me in BF / CoD is that we get always so high price for same generic games, look at Counter Strike Global Offense  it is generic and same as Source but realise price was like 10 $.

Assimilat0r

Global Offense didn't have a whole new campaign and most of the weapons and maps were recycled from CS. CS GO wasn't supposed to be a sequel, it was just supposed to be a bit more focused version of CSS. Valve never said it was going to be anything different.

$60 is not much for a new game if you consider how much life you can get out of these things. People happily pay $60 a year for a new CoD game and then go ahead and get dozens if not hundreds of hours at it. At what point do you believe you've gotten your value out of money? I can blow $100 in a single night out with some friends, $60 is nothing for a shooter like Battlefield. 

If you want something new and original you aren't really going to find it with big budget shooters. Even Bioshock Infinite isn't really original aside from the setting and characters. 

#50 Posted by nutcrackr (12465 posts) -

Well... the most epicest of the epic of awesomest of teh ever after

It looks great, clear visual improvements, much better open level design during combat. If they go all the way towards letting the player use vehicles, go on foot etc then it might be a nice little sandbox game. The scripted bits look excellent, the way the chopper crashed was gob smacking. Not sure what people are expecting from a sp battlefield.

But who knows, maybe this negativity will mean that people will actually like it on release instead of with BF3 where they drooled over the sp earthquake video and then went full on "BF3 worst ever" 4 weeks after it came out.