Battlefield 4 thoughts

Looks like BF3 with better faces on player models.

Apparently now you can pay $10 extra to get beta access and DLC content as you pre-order. 

http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/preorder/
I don't understand the incentive. Shouldn't that be apart of the initial reasoning to pre-order? Oh wait... 

Seems as if they've begun making your $60 pre-orders receive the bare minimum whereas to receive anything more, you have to pay extra. So much for pre-order incentives.

it doesnt bother me that its an origin title at all. It bothers me that I know there wont be VOIP again because of Battlelog whereas our console brethren get it.bonafidetk

Warfighter used Battlelog but it also had an in-game server browser and in-game VoiP. That ran on the Frostbite 2 engine as well. 

DICE knows that Battlelog's VoiP was not only not used often, it was crap. I doubt they'll not have in-game VoiP. I can see them using Battlelog as a server browser again though.

[QUOTE="bonafidetk"]it doesnt bother me that its an origin title at all. It bothers me that I know there wont be VOIP again because of Battlelog whereas our console brethren get it.Wasdie

Warfighter used Battlelog but it also had an in-game server browser and in-game VoiP. That ran on the Frostbite 2 engine as well. 

DICE knows that Battlelog's VoiP was not only not used often, it was crap. I doubt they'll not have in-game VoiP. I can see them using Battlelog as a server browser again though.

The only selling point on BF4 for me would be more focus on squads again. They really gotta stop giving so much leeway for lonewolfing. Leave that crap to TDM.

Visually I was impressed.. Cannot comment on its SP campaign yet but hopefully it will be better than BF3's campaign..

Also I believe its mp will be awesome and thats the main selling point in the BF series !!

Have to save up money for a new gaming PC + PS4 :P

Anyone worried about it being a linear retread of BF3, worry no more (though haters be hatin' anyways).

Game Informer listed 18 things they know about BF4, and my personal favorites: 

- Battlefield 3's campaign was criticized for its painful linearity. For the follow-up, DICE is sticking more to its expertise, introducing open micro-sandboxes that incorporate vehicles and allow players to engage the enemy in whatever manner they choose. You could hop in a jeep to get to the hot zone, or move carefully on foot from cover to cover. You could take out all the tangos yourself, or call in a support strike from a helicopter. You could hang back and take out enemies with a sniper rifle, or equip a shotgun and get up close and personal. These action bubbles will often be book-ended by cinematic set piece moments.

- You don't have full control over your squadmates, but you can order them to engage enemies or offer suppressing fire, which would allow you to flank the enemy while they are pinned down.

- The sandboxes are also more dynamic and interactive than the static ones in previous Battlefield games. If you walk to close to a parked car, you may set off a car alarm and alert nearby enemies to your presence. If you move too quickly through a forest, a flock of birds make fly away en masse, signaling to enemies that they should go investigate the area.

On the downside no co-op, but everyone whining that it's just like a new linear DLC retread has no idea what they are talking about, especially in the face of this and the fact that the game was literally just announced and revealed. Like, it isn't out for a while you whiners.

SPYDER0416

Looking forward to it. Always-online, MP focused, $1 to reload a clip, and DLC ridden. I don't even need to watch the trailer to get hyped. Counting the days. MirkoS77

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Wasdie

Let's boycott this game if they do not release MOD tools!  Every game should be released with MOD tools.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Iantheone

You can't really say anything against Premium unless you're one of those entitled gamers that want everything free.

Each expansion adds a butt ton of content with new maps, modes, vehicles and weapons, and Premium basically gives them all to you, plus bonus stuff, for less than if you got them individually. It goes on sale every now and then for like $25-$30 which makes it even sweeter.

I know I'm not Wasdie, but Premium is a great deal, especially if you enjoy BF3. DICE really put a lot of work into these maps.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Iantheone

Premium is fine. It's been well worth the money. The vanilla game had enough content at launch and premium has been a way to keep the game fresh well into 2013.

I don't mind map packs. I'm probably one of the few PC gamers here who doesn't. DICE included more than just 4 maps in each pack, they usually included new weapons or game modes. 

They'll do the same with BF4 and I'll buy that as well.

When you string all 5 DLCs together it's more content than the vanilla game (minus a single player). It's easily the same as like 2 expansions for $30 a piece.

It's one of those things we're never going to get rid of. Custom maps and user built mods for these AAA games are kind of dead, especially for multiplats. Map development tools are just too robust today to make public versions. Unless your engine was built to be sold publically (CryEngine 3, Unreal 3), you really don't have much of a choice.  

Since it's something that we're never getting away from, I feel that it's best supporting DLC that's at least worth the money. The DLC for this game was all worth the $15 you spend. If you look at how many potential hours you get out of a single BF map, then you're easily getting your money's worth. 

I think devs in general have gotten a ton better at DLC as time has gone by. 

Let's boycott this game if they do not release MOD tools!  Every game should be released with MOD tools.

Jakejack

No.

I would explain my position but I figure you either won't bother to listen or wouldn't be able to comprehend (considering you've made such a ridiculous and asinine statement about mod tools) the logic behind it all.

Remember, game devs don't work out of their garages and for pennies anymore. Standard of living has risen dramatically for game developers and they aren't just going to be throwing around their hard work for free. That's what they did 15 years ago when the industry was still pretty young and immature. 

[QUOTE="Iantheone"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Wasdie

I think devs in general have gotten a ton better at DLC as time has gone by. 

This, BF3 and New Vegas both have done DLC very well over the last while. Definatly getting better over the years.

This, BF3 and New Vegas both have done DLC very well over the last while. Definatly getting better over the years.

kozzy1234

EA is even starting to come around on how to do DLC. The DLC for BF3 and Mass Effect 3 has been good, at least value wise.

Then they turn around and do Sim City. I refuse to believe that Maxis is the one making all of the decisions with that game. That sounds like somebody who refuses to acknowledge the PC is different than a console trying to do anything they can to preserve their profit margin. 

 

Premium is fine. It's been well worth the money. 

Wasdie

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="Iantheone"] Hey Wasdie, whats your opinion on Premium? Personally, its the only DLC Ive ever bought. Seems more like an expansion pack than a DLC to me. kozzy1234

I think devs in general have gotten a ton better at DLC as time has gone by. 

This, BF3 and New Vegas both have done DLC very well over the last while. Definatly getting better over the years.

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]Looking forward to it. Always-online, MP focused, $1 to reload a clip, and DLC ridden. I don't even need to watch the trailer to get hyped. Counting the days. Wasdie

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]Looking forward to it. Always-online, MP focused, $1 to reload a clip, and DLC ridden. I don't even need to watch the trailer to get hyped. Counting the days. MirkoS77

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

When it comes to Battlefield, it's hard to tell. So many people actually think like that.

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Wasdie

When it comes to Battlefield, it's hard to tell. So many people actually think like that.

Still a bit annoyed that BC2 got new maps for free and BF3 they charged for them

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Such a mature way to look at it. I guess being an ignorant child about it is so much more superior.

Wasdie

When it comes to Battlefield, it's hard to tell. So many people actually think like that.

Still a bit annoyed that BC2 got new maps for free and BF3 they charged for them

kraken2109

They weren't free if you didn't have a limited edition copy. 

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

Still a bit annoyed that BC2 got new maps for free and BF3 they charged for them

Wasdie

They weren't free if you didn't have a limited edition copy. 

...SPYDER0416

...Wasdie

Haven't even played BF3 yet but it is at the top of my list, as for BF4 let's just say it's predecessor will have rekindled my energy drink addiction, nothing like copious amounts  of caffeine and Battlefield on a good weekend morning!

I completely agree really. The only reason why I'm asking is because all I ever see in-game and on the BF forums is people whinging about how greedy Dice/Ea are, evil DLC, no mod tools so they can make money off of map packs, etc. Iantheone

Mod tools are more or less dead for big budget games. Unless it's some small studio operating with very low operating costs, mod tools are nothing more than a luxury that can be axed when the budget gets tight.

The only exceptions will be if the engine the game is developed on has pre-existing public tools (Unreal 3, CryEngine 3, Skyrim's engine). Then the devs just need to allow the game to accept modified files. 

Usually mods are a big waste of time. The potential for cool mods to be made for a game is always much higher than the mods that are actually made for the game. The best mods today come from smaller games with dedicated communities. ArmA is a great example of this. That modding community isn't going to start making mods for Battlefield 4 if it launches with mod tools, they'll just stick with ArmA. 

Demanding mod tools for all games is straight up ignorant, arrogant, and entitled. It shows that the person demanding such tools knows absolutly nothing about game development nor understands a thing about actual modding.

I completely agree really. The only reason why I'm asking is because all I ever see in-game and on the BF forums is people whinging about how greedy Dice/Ea are, evil DLC, no mod tools so they can make money off of map packs, etc. Iantheone

Mod tools are more or less dead for big budget games. Unless it's some small studio operating with very low operating costs, mod tools are nothing more than a luxury that can be axed when the budget gets tight.

The only exceptions will be if the engine the game is developed on has pre-existing public tools (Unreal 3, CryEngine 3, Skyrim's engine). Then the devs just need to allow the game to accept modified files. 

Usually mods are a big waste of time. The potential for cool mods to be made for a game is always much higher than the mods that are actually made for the game. The best mods today come from smaller games with dedicated communities. ArmA is a great example of this. That modding community isn't going to start making mods for Battlefield 4 if it launches with mod tools, they'll just stick with ArmA. 

Demanding mod tools for all games is straight up ignorant, arrogant, and entitled. It shows that the person demanding such tools knows absolutely nothing about game development nor understands a thing about actual modding.

I love mods and I love playing them and I encourage developers to open their games for modding so that we can expand upon them. However I'm not going to vilify developers for not taking the time to make dev tools. They cost time and money and I would rather them just focus on making a good game instead of trying to waste their time and money doing something that only a very tiny percentage of the playerbase is even going to bother with. 

really should have been 2143yellosnolvr

[QUOTE="yellosnolvr"]really should have been 2143Gooeykat

DICE keeps hinting at it in the BF3 DLC. My guess is that EA wanted to try to milk this modern military shooter fad as long as possible. Considering that Black Ops 2 went to the semi-future, and that there are some sci-fi shooters on the market and coming (Bungie's Destiny, Planetside 2, Tribes Ascend) and Bioshock Infinite has been extremely successful, I think there is enough reason for EA to let DICE make another Battlefield in the future.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="kraken2109"]

Still a bit annoyed that BC2 got new maps for free and BF3 they charged for them

kraken2109

They weren't free if you didn't have a limited edition copy. 

Are you really comparing DICE releasing two reused maps from BC2 whenever they felt like it, to BF3 releasing 4 new maps, new weapons, vehicles and game modes every few months?

BC2 never released new maps until the end, the only time they released any content on par with an expansion from BF3 was with the Vietnam expansion, which was $15.

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Nothing is wrong with Origin. Certain features of Origin are actually better than Steam and overall Origin is in a much better state than Steam was 2 years into its life. 

The Origin store even has good deals from time to time.

Wasdie

Download speeds can be quicker, the in-game HTML browser is better. Those are about it. It has no community features, but the store is up to par with Steam's in terms of build quality and usability. 

Steam is overall better, but Origin isn't bad like people make it out to be.

DICE keeps hinting at it in the BF3 DLC. My guess is that EA wanted to try to milk this modern military shooter fad as long as possible. Considering that Black Ops 2 went to the semi-future, and that there are some sci-fi shooters on the market and coming (Bungie's Destiny, Planetside 2, Tribes Ascend) and Bioshock Infinite has been extremely successful, I think there is enough reason for EA to let DICE make another Battlefield in the future.

Wasdie

It will happen eventually. Either as a full new game next year, or as DLC for BF4. I'm not completely convinced on buying BF4. Just gotta see how it will turn out for the next few months.

I love how over dymatic it is, not even an action hero in amovie goes though stuff that dymatic! Getting on helicopter whilst dodging bullets from an enemy helicopter, then dodge the helicopter your trying to get on, then dodge a tower falling on you, building starts to fall under you, slide down the ccrumbling building, hang of a ledge for deal life, and try safe your squad buddy from falling as a helicopter blows up right under you! Just funny how over dymatic it is, like someone in the military would experince that. 

If they really want to make it feel like a Battlefield game during the single player, they'll have to not take control away from the player. I would LOVE to see a level with scripted events that you don't have to do, or events that kind of compile. For example.

Level where you have to assault a frontline, then push into a warehouse district. It starts you off carrying some AT and an assault rifle + pistol. Pretty basic. Mission starts in the same place every time and probably has some starting cinimatic moment of the Americans pushing into the line. When the shooting starts it opens up a bit. You have 2-3 distinct paths with some overlapping, each presenting a few different options. Let's say on the ground there are some tanks with infantry, through a flank there are trenches loaded with mortars, and then on the open ground inbetween there are helos attacking. All you have to do is get through the line.

If you destroy the tanks they are gone, if you destroy the helos they are gone, and if you destory the mortars they are gone. However since you can only really complete 2/3 objectives since lateral movement through the level is impossible due to the design of the level, later on you'll have to deal with what you didn't complete at the beginning. If I run through the trenches but leave the tanks and helos alone, then later on I'll be attacked by the helos in an awesome scripted sequence while attacking the warehouse. The tanks I didn't destroy could cut off one route through the rest of the level. If I didn't destroy the mortars but took out the tanks and helis, later on the mortars will have displaced and then while I'm attacking the warehouse they'll be hitting the roof and causing collapses.

That's just the general idea. Game is still linear and full of setpeices, but your input and how you push through the linear level affects what happens later on in the level. This would really make the game more diverse yet full of action and would make the game feel much more like Battlefield and less like CoD. Each playthrough would be a bit different as enemies are all persistent. Until they are dead, they are constantly falling back and attacking you or your allies a bit differently. Just build the levels so that a player cannot destory all enemies at once. Force them down some paths that deny them access to certain enemies and then go from there.

One thing they definitely need to bring back is the ability to select my weapon loadout, like in BC1 and 2. It was great that I had multiple ways through a level, not just through the level design, but through the guns I could take.

Do I want to snipe and slowly advance? Take an LMG and blast my way through? Maybe I take a rocket launcher to deal with pesky vehicles the enemy might have, or use a shotgun and stick to tight areas?

It would even work considering you aren't some regular grunt, but it seems like Tombstone Alpha is a more special branch where that might be allowed.

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

[QUOTE="bonafidetk"]it doesnt bother me that its an origin title at all. It bothers me that I know there wont be VOIP again because of Battlelog whereas our console brethren get it.bonafidetk

Warfighter used Battlelog but it also had an in-game server browser and in-game VoiP. That ran on the Frostbite 2 engine as well. 

DICE knows that Battlelog's VoiP was not only not used often, it was crap. I doubt they'll not have in-game VoiP. I can see them using Battlelog as a server browser again though.

[QUOTE="bonafidetk"][QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Warfighter used Battlelog but it also had an in-game server browser and in-game VoiP. That ran on the Frostbite 2 engine as well. 

DICE knows that Battlelog's VoiP was not only not used often, it was crap. I doubt they'll not have in-game VoiP. I can see them using Battlelog as a server browser again though.

JigglyWiggly_

So what if you're annoyed by it. Turn off your "receive volume" in your settings and never hear people talk. 

The lack of in-game VoiP for BF3 really killed the social part of the Battlefield experiance. Back in BF2 and 2142 teamwork and coordination was much more common in pub matches because you could easily talk to your squad. You didn't have to join some VoiP sever somehwere or invite them to your chat on the broken Battlelog VoiP service. You just had your mic and would hit push to talk whenever you needed to talk to your squad. It was that simple and it made people much more prone to working together.

One thing they definitely need to bring back is the ability to select my weapon loadout, like in BC1 and 2. It was great that I had multiple ways through a level, not just through the level design, but through the guns I could take.

Do I want to snipe and slowly advance? Take an LMG and blast my way through? Maybe I take a rocket launcher to deal with pesky vehicles the enemy might have, or use a shotgun and stick to tight areas?

It would even work considering you aren't some regular grunt, but it seems like Tombstone Alpha is a more special branch where that might be allowed.

SPYDER0416

It seems that's the route they are going with, only they probably won't have you stop to choose a loadout, they'll probably just be more generous with what weapons they lay around the level.