Battlefield 4 reveal due "in about 90 days"

  • 91 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by campzor (34932 posts) -

Source

Gaf link

EA will be revealing more about Battlefield 4 "in about 90 days" time, the publisher has teased - including a potential reveal on next-generation formats.

"We've already talked a little bit about that we have a Battlefield title coming next year, but we're not in a position right now to talk about our development plans and our SKU plan long term," said EA Labels president Frank Gibeau during EA's earnings call last night (transcribed by Seeking Alpha).

"That will come in about 90 days when we get to show you some Battlefield stuff."

Gibeau's comments suggest that EA is gearing up for a late-April reveal for Battlefield 4, weeks after next-generation consoles are expected to be announced by Sony and Microsoft.

 

 

That is somewhat a few weeks-month after GDC...

Next gen reveals then? ;O

#2 Posted by ChubbyGuy40 (26150 posts) -

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

#3 Posted by campzor (34932 posts) -

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

ChubbyGuy40
hopefully there is NO campaign, and they just allow you to play mp with bots, just like bf2 -.-
#4 Posted by RR360DD (11956 posts) -
I don't understand the hate for the SP, it was so much more enjoyable than Black ops 2.
#5 Posted by Desmonic (14123 posts) -
So they'll try to create some hype right before E3 huh? I'm guessing they'll try to show some sort of "epic" teaser to have a blowout of info on E3. Just my 2 cents.
#6 Posted by carlisledavid79 (10503 posts) -
Cool, look forward to hearing more about it.
#8 Posted by PAL360 (26888 posts) -

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

campzor

hopefully there is NO campaign, and they just allow you to play mp with bots, just like bf2 -.-

Totally agree! Battlefield games don't need campaign. Add more mp maps and modes instead. Bots would be awesome, to replace ppl who jump out.

#9 Posted by clyde46 (46316 posts) -
128 players.
#10 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

Nice. I love me some Battlefield. Logged quite a considerable amount of time into BF3 and I am looking forward to the next one. I can see it being pretty similar to BF3 but a lot more polished hopefully. Visuals might get a bump too as MOH warfighter looked better than BF3 in spots and they've had more time to tinker with the engine

#11 Posted by o0squishy0o (2758 posts) -

So depressing that I have managed to miss out on this title... well battlefield 3. I can remember hugely hyped for it, but I never got round to getting it.

#12 Posted by megadeth1117 (1830 posts) -

I don't understand the hate for the SP, it was so much more enjoyable than Black ops 2.RR360DD

svvdm95.gif

#13 Posted by Master_ShakeXXX (13361 posts) -

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

ChubbyGuy40

lol, who freakin cares about the single player in these games? I'd rather they make them online only and focus entirely on the multiplayer. 

You know how people say "I wish they wouldn't include a half-baked multiplayer mode and put all of their efforts into making a great single player experience"? Well that can work both ways for certain games. Battlefield doesn't  need  singleplayer. Frankly I think it's a waste in this case.

#14 Posted by silversix_ (14643 posts) -
unless its futuristic (like BF 2042) i don't care. Never thought i'd say this to a BF game but im pretty much tired as fk of modern theme. Cannot stand it anymore no matter how of a quality the game is.
#15 Posted by osirisx3 (1780 posts) -

should be on ps4

#16 Posted by campzor (34932 posts) -

should be on ps4

osirisx3
there's a good chance it will be on the ps4/720, possibly a launch game for the systems (and obviously be available for ps3/360 as well..)
#17 Posted by JohnF111 (14093 posts) -
I wonder what they'll do to improve upon BF3? I hope they make it less capable of soloing, nothing worse than seeing 7 people scatter to go do their own thing and you're trying to beat win a losing battle.
#18 Posted by Master_ShakeXXX (13361 posts) -

I don't understand the hate for the SP, it was so much more enjoyable than Black ops 2.RR360DD

Don't be ridiculous.

#19 Posted by skrat_01 (33767 posts) -
I'm not surprised. Just hope they fix the plethora of things wrong with BF3, and bring it up to standard of 2142 in terms of actual strategy and tactics. And fix all the ****ty unlocks, maps and Battlelog woes. Oh, and that rubbish singleplayer.
#20 Posted by NAPK1NS (14870 posts) -
Sigh... I remember when a new Battlefield game was a monumental release. After 3, I don't expect many people to be throwing their wallets with as much fervor. Not that 3 was bad, but it was hardly as grand as B2.
#21 Posted by DivineSword (15754 posts) -

hopefully there is NO campaign, and they just allow you to play mp with bots, just like bf2 -.-campzor
Yes we really need bots, especially for someone like me that can't fly the jet if my life depends on it.

#22 Posted by SaltyMeatballs (25150 posts) -
90 days sounds shorter than 3 months.
#23 Posted by Wasdie (49927 posts) -

I hope its BF3's gameplay refined, with some BF2 element. I also hope the campaign is more like Bad Company 1 than CoD.

They do all of that, and BF4 will be a winner.

With all of the DLC, BF3 has become the finest multiplayer shooter on the market. The End Game trailer was fantastic.

#24 Posted by MercenaryMafia (2917 posts) -
I would rather have Bad Company 3 now and save Battlefield 4 for next-gen consoles, but hey its EA after all.
#25 Posted by Wasdie (49927 posts) -

I would rather have Bad Company 3 now and save Battlefield 4 for next-gen consoles, but hey its EA after all.MercenaryMafia

Rumors are that BF4 will be on both of the next gen consoles. 64 players at 60fps as well.

#26 Posted by JangoWuzHere (16442 posts) -
[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

campzor
hopefully there is NO campaign, and they just allow you to play mp with bots, just like bf2 -.-

That would be awful.
#27 Posted by PAL360 (26888 posts) -

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

JangoWuzHere

hopefully there is NO campaign, and they just allow you to play mp with bots, just like bf2 -.-

That would be awful.

Why? I think it would be awesome, as long as the lack of campaign means more mp content.

#28 Posted by Tessellation (8803 posts) -
it will launch on next generation consoles and that's an smart move..
#29 Posted by JangoWuzHere (16442 posts) -

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

Master_ShakeXXX

lol, who freakin cares about the single player in these games? I'd rather they make them online only and focus entirely on the multiplayer. 

You know how people say "I wish they wouldn't include a half-baked multiplayer mode and put all of their efforts into making a great single player experience"? Well that can work both ways for certain games. Battlefield doesn't  need  singleplayer. Frankly I think it's a waste in this case.

I think DICE has made it clear that they can make good single player games with there Bad Company games. I think it would be disappointing if they didn't even attempt a campaign.
#30 Posted by KungfuKitten (21081 posts) -

Seems a bit early to ask of gamers to buy a new PC again. Imo they should have waited a year or two with the next one, and made it count, and made it not have singleplayer.

#31 Posted by tonitorsi (8397 posts) -

Nice. I love me some Battlefield. Logged quite a considerable amount of time into BF3 and I am looking forward to the next one. I can see it being pretty similar to BF3 but a lot more polished hopefully. Visuals might get a bump too as MOH warfighter looked better than BF3 in spots and they've had more time to tinker with the engine

seanmcloughlin

Better physics tho.

#32 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -
Makes sense to not get in the way of the final BF3 DLC.
So they'll try to create some hype right before E3 huh? I'm guessing they'll try to show some sort of "epic" teaser to have a blowout of info on E3. Just my 2 cents.Desmonic
This is what I thought as well.
#33 Posted by klusps (10381 posts) -

A little too early for Battlefield 4 for me. If they made huge improvements like more players, including some features from BF2, and bigger maps, then I might consider. 

#34 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

Nice. I love me some Battlefield. Logged quite a considerable amount of time into BF3 and I am looking forward to the next one. I can see it being pretty similar to BF3 but a lot more polished hopefully. Visuals might get a bump too as MOH warfighter looked better than BF3 in spots and they've had more time to tinker with the engine

tonitorsi

Better physics tho.

Yeah BF3s physics and destruction were disappointing, I want more of it. 

#35 Posted by Inconsistancy (8091 posts) -

[QUOTE="campzor"][QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

I wonder which poorly-fitting rap/hip-hop/wubstep song they'll use for the TV commercial.

Wonder how bad the SP will be this time. Hopefully they do more co-op missions though. That's one thing I actually wanted DLC for in BF3.

PAL360

hopefully there is NO campaign, and they just allow you to play mp with bots, just like bf2 -.-

Totally agree! Battlefield games don't need campaign. Add more mp maps and modes instead. Bots would be awesome, to replace ppl who jump out.

2143 and modding! None of that will happen, EA is still dead set on trying to be the next CoD. Modding isn't fair because consoles won't be able to do it and is to hard for us, according to them.

We shouldn't even have a BF game coming out so soon, it should have at least 4 years between versions, especially if it's just the same modern military shooter as before.

#36 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

I think BF4 coming before BC3 makes sense to start a next gen BF off and from a main series iteration rather than a spin off, that's my guess of why BF4 is coming before BC3.

#37 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

I think BF4 coming before BC3 makes sense to start a next gen BF off and from a main series iteration rather than a spin off, that's my guess of why BF4 is coming before BC3.

mitu123

Wouldn't be a bad guess either

#38 Posted by LazyKris_89 (18 posts) -
I haven't even got BF3 yet, because I got way too many other games to play. lol at BF on next gen consoles!
#39 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

I think BF4 coming before BC3 makes sense to start a next gen BF off and from a main series iteration rather than a spin off, that's my guess of why BF4 is coming before BC3.

seanmcloughlin

Wouldn't be a bad guess either

Yeah I thought hard about it and wonder why they wouldn't do a spin off series for their next game and then realized those next gen consoles would come out so it would make sense to have a main series title than any spinoff ones like 2143 or BC3.

#40 Posted by fernandmondego_ (3170 posts) -
Thankfully it will probably be a next gen tittle and DICE could (hopefully) bring us something special.
#41 Posted by Sushiglutton (5306 posts) -
Four player co-op campaign so you can play with your squad. Also SP practice courses for vehicles and the different classes would be nice.
#42 Posted by PCgameruk (1425 posts) -
128 players.clyde46
We should be well above that. BF3 should of been 128 this gen at least.
#43 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

[QUOTE="clyde46"]128 players.PCgameruk
We should be well above that. BF3 should of been 128 this gen at least.

256 players?

#44 Posted by DarkLink77 (31697 posts) -

[QUOTE="PCgameruk"][QUOTE="clyde46"]128 players.mitu123

We should be well above that. BF3 should of been 128 this gen at least.

256 players?

Oh, Lord. The more players = better game argument.
#45 Posted by DarkLink77 (31697 posts) -

And so EA begins the destruction of Battlefield. Gotta have one every year to compete with dat CoD. Gotta retake dat shooter market that we never owned in the first place. 

lolEA.

#46 Posted by Wasdie (49927 posts) -

[QUOTE="clyde46"]128 players.PCgameruk
We should be well above that. BF3 should of been 128 this gen at least.

More != better.

64 is plenty large. When you start making 128 or larger player mapos, you start having a real problem if you cannot get at least 100 players in the server. 

#47 Posted by Wasdie (49927 posts) -

And so EA begins the destruction of Battlefield. Gotta have one every year to compete with dat CoD. Gotta retake dat shooter market that we never owned in the first place. 

lolEA.

DarkLink77

Every year?

BF3 came out in 2011 and it only took them about 1 year to develop after 1 year of pre-production.

That's how game development is today. A team of 230-250 can pump out a full game in 1 year no problem, as long as the ground work and thinking has been done first. Typical big-buget game development time is about 2 years. One for pre-production with a small team and the leaders of the game, and then full production which involves 200+. This way that 200+ can move from project to project easily. You don't have to worry about laying off people inbetween games, you can just keep having people work on different games and pump out content for those. 

While they were doing pre-production for BF3, the DICE team was working on a Need for Speed project and Medal of Honor 2010's multiplayer.

They have a seperate team at DICE that does engine work. That team only works on the Frosbite 2.0 engine. Unlike for BF3, BF4 will have an advantage of a finished engine and a lot more mature of an engine. 

#48 Posted by Pug-Nasty (8508 posts) -

I don't understand the hate for the SP, it was so much more enjoyable than Black ops 2.RR360DD

 

If Black Ops II was our metric for what a game needs to be better than to be good, then gaming would be dead.

#49 Posted by DarkLink77 (31697 posts) -

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

And so EA begins the destruction of Battlefield. Gotta have one every year to compete with dat CoD. Gotta retake dat shooter market that we never owned in the first place. 

lolEA.

Wasdie

Every year?

BF3 came out in 2011.

Medal of Honor was last year's spunkgargleweewee release from EA. Next years will be BF4. And since they're benching MoH because EA is too lazy to give the series the time and money it needs to be good, Battlefield will probably be picking up the slack unless Repawn gets their act together. Then EA will milk that IP to death, too. Man, I remember when true Battlefield sequels were events. F*cking EA. Worst publisher ever.
#50 Posted by Wasdie (49927 posts) -

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

And so EA begins the destruction of Battlefield. Gotta have one every year to compete with dat CoD. Gotta retake dat shooter market that we never owned in the first place. 

lolEA.

DarkLink77

Every year?

BF3 came out in 2011.

Medal of Honor was last year's spunkgargleweewee release from EA. Next years will be BF4. And since they're benching MoH because EA is too lazy to give the series the time and money it needs to be good, Battlefield will probably be picking up the slack unless Repawn gets their act together. Then EA will milk that IP to death, too. Man, I remember when true Battlefield sequels were events. F*cking EA. Worst publisher ever.

MoH was done by Danger Close. EA works with more than one studio. Oh btw, you should check out the history of BF game launches. There has been a game or an expansion nearly every year since 2002.

Also, as I edited to my post after you responded I'll say it again...

.A team of 230-250 can pump out a full game in 1 year no problem, as long as the ground work and thinking has been done first. Typical big-buget game development time is about 2 years. One for pre-production with a small team and the leaders of the game, and then full production which involves 200+. This way that 200+ can move from project to project easily. You don't have to worry about laying off people inbetween games, you can just keep having people work on different games and pump out content for those. 

While they were doing pre-production for BF3, the DICE team was working on a Need for Speed project and Medal of Honor 2010's multiplayer.

They have a seperate team at DICE that does engine work. That team only works on the Frosbite 2.0 engine. Unlike for BF3, BF4 will have an advantage of a finished engine and a lot more mature of an engine. 

So settle down.