Battlefield 4 Beta Clarifications

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Responding to complaints about the BF4 Beta being tied to the purchase of MoH Warfighter, EA's community manager made the following statement on Reddit:

  • There will be other ways to get into the beta aside from MoH Warfighter. At this time, however, it is the only way to guarantee entry.
  • We've been seeing a lot of concerns about the pacing of release (i.e. "only" two years after BF3). I think it's worth noting that DICE has released a Battlefield game every two years or sooner AND Mirror's Edge at least every two years. I truly believe that we're in one of the best positions to be creating our next title - Frostbite 2 has matured, we've been gathering fan feedback like crazy, Battlefield 3 continues to expand with features which we can learn from, and we've got more data about how people play than ever.
Click to expand...
 
Unless they go back to a traditional game-based multiplayer interface, count me out. I cant stand the browser/game hybrid.
 
So when did Beta's become money makers? buy software to get the Beta, whatever happened to free signups?
 
Spire3660 said:
Unless they go back to a traditional game-based multiplayer interface, count me out. I cant stand the browser/game hybrid.
Click to expand...

Same. Currently my pc isn't a super powerful one so loading new games/modes/servers is the biggest pain in the ass. Tack on the crap programming and crashes and you have a healthy nerdrage atleast twice a week.
 
Every two years? Maybe if you count Bad Company which I do not (hell, BC1 was a console game!). Battlefield 2142 => Battlefield 3 was not 2 years.
 
so... announcing bf4 right after opting a premium bf3 service... gotta hand it to ea they do asshole well. Wonder how long it'll take them this time to force us to buy our own servers this time despite requiring online passes.
 
I dont really care. I going to buy MoH Warfighter anyway, the last MoH was pretty awesome and I thought it had way more potential than BF3. Unfortunately the MP was sort of half assed and I think because of all the controversy surrounding it, it didnt sell well and they just never did anything further with the MP.

Hoping this time around they put some damn effort into the MP.
 
I have no problem with them releasing Battlefield every two years but only IF it takes two years to develop it. I'm having a hunch that Battlefield 4 development just started and all we will get is a re-skinned BF3.

Booo!
 
Volkum said:
Every two years? Maybe if you count Bad Company which I do not (hell, BC1 was a console game!). Battlefield 2142 => Battlefield 3 was not 2 years.
Click to expand...

If you don't count all the games between 1942 and BF3 than it technically took them 9 years to make BF3.
 
I think it's worth noting that DICE has released a Battlefield game every two years or sooner AND Mirror's Edge at least every two years.
Click to expand...

Wait didn't Battlefield 2 get released in 2004, that's a heck of a gap from then to 2007 where 2142 was a brief stop gap. And WTF has Mirrors Edge got to do with anything that hasn't had a sequel yet and that was almost four years ago.
 
They definitely need to ditch the web browser interface. It's what I hate most about Battlefield 3. It's terrible! What the hell were they thinking?
 
No need for a new battlefield game at all. Just keep expanding and improving BF3. Hell from the 3 and just call it Battlefield. Every three months release new mutltiplayer maps and content for $15.

Except... that doesn't work because the PC community has this fucked up idea that new content and support should be free. So this is what you cheap ass complainers get... it unfortunalty sucks for people who actually see value in $15 for four maps they will get hours of play from, or a premium service that gives you a ton of crap.

Hell I would pay a monthly fee to play battlefield... it has that much value to me.

::sigh::
 
XvMMvX said:
No need for a new battlefield game at all. Just keep expanding and improving BF3. Hell from the 3 and just call it Battlefield. Every three months release new mutltiplayer maps and content for $15.

Except... that doesn't work because the PC community has this fucked up idea that new content and support should be free. So this is what you cheap ass complainers get... it unfortunalty sucks for people who actually see value in $15 for four maps they will get hours of play from, or a premium service that gives you a ton of crap.

Hell I would pay a monthly fee to play battlefield... it has that much value to me.

::sigh::
Click to expand...

Yeah, free content and support is such a fucked-up idea...


...except that's how it USED to be, and that's how many other developers these days still operate.

I'm glad that you like Battlefield so much, but attitudes like "I would pay a monthly fee to play" are the reason why EA feels justified in nickle-and-diming everyone to death.
 
I figured they went the web interface route so they could sell ad-space. Though I havent seen any ads there yet.
 
MavericK96 said:
Yeah, free content and support is such a fucked-up idea...


...except that's how it USED to be, and that's how many other developers these days still operate.

I'm glad that you like Battlefield so much, but attitudes like "I would pay a monthly fee to play" are the reason why EA feels justified in nickle-and-diming everyone to death.
Click to expand...

Free support? We bought the game didnt we?

I buy anything else, and it gets supported in its warranty period right?

Did the sales from the original vanilla game NOT cover the development costs with a good amount of money left over?

[H] has a sticky down in the gamine forum for End of Reality Game Servers. I PM'ed the guy who runs it and asked if he has to give kick backs for hosting the BF servers. He openly denied comment, which is pretty much all the verification you need.

I think THAT is what pisses me off the most. I want to run my own server.
 
except that's how it USED to be, and that's how many other developers these days still operate.
Click to expand...

Things change, industries change, gaming a blown up from what it was when it USED to be like that.

You used to be able to buy cable for the whole house for a flat fee... now they charge per outlet.

My grandfather used to say he could go to the movies with 50 cents, get his ticket, popcorn, soda, and have a dime left over for a call home when he was ready to get picked up.

I'm glad that you like Battlefield so much, but attitudes like "I would pay a monthly fee to play" are the reason why EA feels justified in nickle-and-diming everyone to death.
Click to expand...

Try having any other hobby and get out into the real world. You will learn that gaming has a long ways to go in terms of "nickel and diming" you to death. Go play just one round of golf.
 
Game Master 128 said:
They definitely need to ditch the web browser interface. It's what I hate most about Battlefield 3. It's terrible! What the hell were they thinking?
Click to expand...

I actually love it. It's not something I would want to see in many games but it's still the best server browser DICE has ever done.
 
The vocal part of the BF community tends to have an active hatred of COD - is it any wonder that it is getting pissed off when its beloved franchise keeps copying every play from the COD playbook? No wonder EA/DICE has had to go into damage control over this and start vowing to not create sequel fatigue when we'll have Battlefield 6 by 2017.

XvMMvX said:
Things change, industries change, gaming a blown up from what it was when it USED to be like that.

You used to be able to buy cable for the whole house for a flat fee... now they charge per outlet.

My grandfather used to say he could go to the movies with 50 cents, get his ticket, popcorn, soda, and have a dime left over for a call home when he was ready to get picked up.



Try having any other hobby and get out into the real world. You will learn that gaming has a long ways to go in terms of "nickel and diming" you to death. Go play just one round of golf.
Click to expand...

Gaming companies must love you; you are so eager to just give them money at any opportunity, and actively convince everyone else to do the same and call them names if they don't.
 
Free support? We bought the game didnt we?

I buy anything else, and it gets supported in its warranty period right?
Click to expand...

Sorry, I meant support as just new content in general. If the game is broken they need to fix it.
 
There is going to be a mass exodus from the series for BF4. I, and just about everyone I know who bought the game, was expecting a sequel to bf2. Most BF2 buyers were not happy for so many reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if PC sales are terrible and they abandon the platform altogether, seems like the new DICE thing to do.
 
Gaming companies must love you; you are so eager to just give them money at any opportunity, and actively convince everyone else to do the same and call them names if they don't.
Click to expand...

You are first when you call people idiots, console kiddies, or stupid because of how they choose to spend there money.
 
XvMMvX said:
Things change, industries change, gaming a blown up from what it was when it USED to be like that.

You used to be able to buy cable for the whole house for a flat fee... now they charge per outlet.

My grandfather used to say he could go to the movies with 50 cents, get his ticket, popcorn, soda, and have a dime left over for a call home when he was ready to get picked up.
Click to expand...

How is this even a comparison? Inflation rose the ticket prices over the years. The same way that one could buy a car 100 years ago for $300.

When you'll be a grandpa you'll be saying the same thing when movie ticket prices are $50 a pop. The industry itself did not necessarily have to change.

The gaming industry has changed. DLC, "free" MMOs, it's all a part of the giant bullshit scheme we have to endure.

And don't bring expansion packs into the topic. Expansion packs used to have 100x more content then DLCs. And yet DLCs are damn expensive compared to the whole game.

Oh here's a new Battlefield... Ooops, sorry guys, we included some DLCs on the DVD. You can't have it, but it's there. PAY US.

Well, fucks EA, their $70 games (MOH preorder?), and the entire nickle diming scheme.
 
I swear some of you have NO concept of opportunity cost or the value of time vs dollar spent. It is like you people do NOTHING else in this world to give a comparsion to how much gaming actually costs.

Things that you learn in the ONE economics course you are required to take to graduate high school.

Seriously the concept is simple, don't like it don't buy it. Our point is simple, gaming is still CHEAP even with the way things are now, and things had to change as you keep demanding bigger and better graphics and such. If the open market didn't like it or accept it, it would fail.

The best example of this is Guitar Hero... fell flat on its face as the market had had enough.
 
XvMMvX said:
Things change, industries change, gaming a blown up from what it was when it USED to be like that.

You used to be able to buy cable for the whole house for a flat fee... now they charge per outlet.

My grandfather used to say he could go to the movies with 50 cents, get his ticket, popcorn, soda, and have a dime left over for a call home when he was ready to get picked up.

Try having any other hobby and get out into the real world. You will learn that gaming has a long ways to go in terms of "nickel and diming" you to death. Go play just one round of golf.
Click to expand...

So basically your argument is that inflation occurs (which has nothing to do with this at all) and that because other hobbies (obviously not all, bu you make it sound like that) nickel-and-dime you to death as well, we should just accept it.

Okay, well, you can do that. I'll be over here buying games and supporting developers who actually give a damn about their customers and not solely about a profit margin.
 
Okay, well, you can do that. I'll be over here buying games and supporting developers who actually give a damn about their customers and not solely about a profit margin.
Click to expand...

Thats fine and so will I, but unfortunaly not caring about profits and the business side of things is why they generally go bankrupt. Look at the company that made Kingdoms of Amuler (Sp?), they went belly up trying to be the "hipster" dev.

Doing this the "gaming hispter" way can not support a game of the magnitude of BF3. It just can't, and how any fan of FPS cannot like BF3 is beyond me. One of the best multiplayer FPS's I have played in a LONG time.

Its either EA/Activisions model or the F2P model in the future, and you guys bitch about both.
 
Just finished the goddamn Mirrors edge trilogy , and then you can release 1000's of version of battlefield.
 
Master_of_Sparks said:
I actually love it. It's not something I would want to see in many games but it's still the best server browser DICE has ever done.
Click to expand...

It wasn't bad, didn't hate the interface, did seem slower reloading the game etc when issue of change servers came up.

True it IS the best server browser they have ever done, but that is not saying much since for some reason they put out crappy browser after crappy browser then have to patch it up (pretty much the same way) with each game to appease fans. Have no clue why none of them learned from their mistakes.


I used to play a ton of BF3, for a while was in the top 200 in jets (got bored after patch and HS couldn't hit me).

I just stopped playing, the maps got boring:

*Map packs that weren't diverse (aka a whole CQB pack???? for BF??? really????) to keep me interested.

*No map mods and limited server control meant organized play grew old very fast.

*Slow patches, HUGE issues weren't patched in a timely fashion (come on HS missiles couldn't damage???)

I am not going to guy BF4 until sale time, the industry has pretty much killed any replay-ability of their games (which is understandable from a business point of view).

I don't see what the problem is with doing booster/add-ons. The map pack DLC sucks. BF2 added a few that really improved the game with grapples and ziplines etc. These added replay-ability of all the maps.
 
I have no interest in Battlefield 4 if its anything like 3.

-Get rid of all the blinding effects. The sun, flashlight, laser, and any other crap that glares up your screen making it unplayable and uncompetitive in multiplayer.

-Get rid of the stupid whiteout filter that makes everything look super washed out with a weirdass blueish/whiteish tint.

-Put squad VoiP back into the game.

-Increase player visibility. People blend in to the environment way to well. This problem is compounded with all the other issues listed above. I feel like the vegatation and shadows are constantly killing me, not players.

-Get some level designers that actually know how to make fun map layouts.
 
Spire3660 said:
Unless they go back to a traditional game-based multiplayer interface, count me out. I cant stand the browser/game hybrid.
Click to expand...

to this day I still can't get pings to show up correctly. I don't care if it's in a browser in the damn game just make it work right.
 
XvMMvX said:
You are first when you call people idiots, console kiddies, or stupid because of how they choose to spend there money.
Click to expand...

Well you don't have to try to prove his point so well by using there, rather than their, but w/e :D
 
Master_of_Sparks said:
I actually love it. It's not something I would want to see in many games but it's still the best server browser DICE has ever done.
Click to expand...

Not sure why so many people hate it. It works and is nice to be out of game between matches to browse around. Doesn't take very long to load into a different server.
 
XvMMvX said:
I swear some of you have NO concept of opportunity cost or the value of time vs dollar spent. It is like you people do NOTHING else in this world to give a comparsion to how much gaming actually costs.

Things that you learn in the ONE economics course you are required to take to graduate high school.

Seriously the concept is simple, don't like it don't buy it. Our point is simple, gaming is still CHEAP even with the way things are now, and things had to change as you keep demanding bigger and better graphics and such. If the open market didn't like it or accept it, it would fail.

The best example of this is Guitar Hero... fell flat on its face as the market had had enough.
Click to expand...

You seem to understand economics. What you don't seem to understand are people and the customer base. When people have a good thing, they don't want it to turn to shit. Your Guitar Hero example is indeed a good comparison. Something many BF fans don't want to see happen to the franchise. Is that really that hard to understand?
 
XvMMvX said:
Thats fine and so will I, but unfortunaly not caring about profits and the business side of things is why they generally go bankrupt. Look at the company that made Kingdoms of Amuler (Sp?), they went belly up trying to be the "hipster" dev.
Click to expand...

No, they went bankrupt because they bet everything on Amalur, which was over-hyped and under-delivered.

XvMMvX said:
Doing this the "gaming hispter" way can not support a game of the magnitude of BF3. It just can't, and how any fan of FPS cannot like BF3 is beyond me. One of the best multiplayer FPS's I have played in a LONG time.
Click to expand...

I have been an avid Battlefield fan since the beginning, and after about 25 hours of BF3 I couldn't stand it anymore. It was infuriating. Battlefield as we knew it is dead, this is EA's "Battlefield" now. I give the game credit for the graphics but that's about it.

XvMMvX said:
Its either EA/Activisions model or the F2P model in the future, and you guys bitch about both.
Click to expand...

That's not true at all. There are dozens of "indie" and otherwise titles that are neither F2P, nor milked for tons of DLC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top