Any news on BattleField 4 ?

an6JVDO.jpg
 
That picture has terrible grammar. I you fix that it would probably seem a little bit more real. As it is that's all I concentrate on... :p
 
EnvymeRT said:
Rush? It will be two years in November. I cannot wait for BF4 and people have stated around the internet many people said it looks amazing on the PS4. Why can't BF4 come out every two years? I mean CoD comes out every year and even though they are garbage they make hundreds of millions off the game.
Click to expand...

Except each COD has a two-year development cycle...
 
Plague_Injected said:
Except each COD has a two-year development cycle...
Click to expand...

2 years for BF might be enough if they would ditch the stupid story mode and go back to being full multiplayer.

EA's CFO pretty much said this is another console port so expect another shitty GUI and limited controller, control schemes again.

"Jorgensen went on to say that thanks to the PlayStation 4′s horsepower, it allows EA to “do a substantial amount of things that we’ve never done before. In addition, “I’ve seen the new Battlefield and it is stunning, I mean it is just amazing; what the imagination of the game developers are allowed to do with that much power,”


PC's have had that much power for years.. it took the PS4 to open their eyes to that much power? rofl.

they lied to us when they said BF3 was designed for pc's first lets see how much hoopla they throw at pc gamers this time.
 
Yep bf3 was made for consoles first proven down to the shitty inexcusable client side net code.
 
lets hope bf4 is not a beta like 3, updates didnt really improve bugs, nerfed weapons, then balanced then nerfed them again. Tons of bugs.

what about no chat within the game. Its 2013!!!!

Origin is garbage, battlelog is garbage. Why do I have to go to a website in order to play a game? Single player was garbage. The only thing that saved the game is that it did look great.

I am done with EA and done with the BF series.
 
Wildace said:
2 years for BF might be enough if they would ditch the stupid story mode and go back to being full multiplayer.

EA's CFO pretty much said this is another console port so expect another shitty GUI and limited controller, control schemes again.

"Jorgensen went on to say that thanks to the PlayStation 4′s horsepower, it allows EA to “do a substantial amount of things that we’ve never done before. In addition, “I’ve seen the new Battlefield and it is stunning, I mean it is just amazing; what the imagination of the game developers are allowed to do with that much power,”


PC's have had that much power for years.. it took the PS4 to open their eyes to that much power? rofl.

they lied to us when they said BF3 was designed for pc's first lets see how much hoopla they throw at pc gamers this time.
Click to expand...

It's going to be a current-gen console port as well, because it's going to be on the 360 and PS3...

I really wish developers would adopt a top-down approach to multiplatform design instead of this abysmal bottom-up method. It should be made with as many bells and whistles as possible for PC, and then scaled down for consoles as required. It worked for Dragon Age: Origins and Metro 2033. It should have worked for BF3 as well but the only reason the PC got such a good-looking version was so the game could act as a tech demo for Frostbite 2. The actual game itself is consolised as fuck.
 
It will be better bc they are making it for the new consoles! Jeez guys, get with the program.

Seriously, from a programmers perspective, how hard is it to simply allow us the features we requested?
 
r3awak3n said:
...battlelog is garbage.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with this. Am I the only person that remembers how shitty the in-game server browsers were in BF1942, Vietnam, BF2, and BF2142? Populations wouldn't update, filters didn't work properly, some servers wouldn't even be visible in the server list, and other issues... I get that it seems backwards to launch a game from a browser and completely close out of the game every time you switch servers, but at least Battlelog actually works. I was apprehensive about it before BF3 was released, and now I have no issues with it.
 
spaceman said:
It will be better bc they are making it for the new consoles! Jeez guys, get with the program.

Seriously, from a programmers perspective, how hard is it to simply allow us the features we requested?
Click to expand...

Haven't you heard, the PS4 is more powerful than our gaming PCs... :rolleyes:

Kryptorchid said:
I have to disagree with this. Am I the only person that remembers how shitty the in-game server browsers were in BF1942, Vietnam, BF2, and BF2142? Populations wouldn't update, filters didn't work properly, some servers wouldn't even be visible in the server list, and other issues... I get that it seems backwards to launch a game from a browser and completely close out of the game every time you switch servers, but at least Battlelog actually works. I was apprehensive about it before BF3 was released, and now I have no issues with it.
Click to expand...

You sir, speak the truth.

I broke my old-school Intellimouse after getting so frustrated with the BF2 server browser that when I added my fist to my anger, the mouse couldn't take the heat.
 
So close quarters combat wasn't close enough, so now were going to all fight in submarines with 2 foot wide corridors.
 
hey guys it took the power of the ps4 to allow them to add ships!!!!!!!!!!!! like omg never seen ships in a BF game before.

/endsarcasm



watch it be a single player mission where you are on a sub in linear combat or on rails like the space combat in SWTOR lol
 
BF3 was pretty damn good game. Not as fun as BC2 was but still had good graphics and gameplay.

I see a lot of people here mentioning it was consolized. Please explain what parts of BF3 was consolized.
 
TheCommander said:
BF3 was pretty damn good game. Not as fun as BC2 was but still had good graphics and gameplay.

I see a lot of people here mentioning it was consolized. Please explain what parts of BF3 was consolized.
Click to expand...

Lack of VOIP is the only thing i can think of. Late game development of the PC version being pushed off to Console development made them push VOIP onto the company they hired to make the web server browser.
 
TheCommander said:
BF3 was pretty damn good game. Not as fun as BC2 was but still had good graphics and gameplay.

I see a lot of people here mentioning it was consolized. Please explain what parts of BF3 was consolized.
Click to expand...

the biggest most overlooked consolized piece of crap in BF3? THE FUCKING SINGLE PLAYER CAMPAIGN.

Battlefield never needed a single player campaign and they didnt happen until consoles were involved because a MP only game might not sell well on consoles.

all that time and money spent on the single player was clearly wasted with BF3 cause the story was crap and i honestly dont think i ever bothered to finish it.

just think of how many more maps or weapons or better gameplay mechanics or modes we could of had in multiplayer if it wasnt for that shitty single player campaign.

maybe we could of had the jets done right? instead of an afterthought just being crammed on top...

the maps and way jets were handled were very console port, no real control options for joysticks ect.

pretty sure my joystick was inverted in BF3 and ill be damned if im going to pilfer through config files looking for a way to fix it and rebind the axis.

it might be fixed now but the maps and service ceiling was way too small and low for me to give a damn.

this was supposed to be battlefield not slightly larger than cod maps.

BF1942 seemed to have the scale pretty good for map sizes because you had prop planes which were slower but felt more like planes.

BF3 has jets which need a much larger map to feel right in, it doesnt have to be perfect but BF3 maps were way way too small and the jets just felt clunky and bad in general.

map sizes is a direct result from consoles having shit memory capacity and the devs no caring about each game play mechanic, and pretty much pasting jets in so they can say "this is a real BF game see... we have jets" which is BS

ive been flying in the BF series competitive since BF1942 wake island demo, helped win 12v12 CAL championship flying in BF2 and the air combat has gone down hill ever since vietnam introduced jets in the series they felt like crap then and they got better in bf2, they got molded into vtol in 2142 and in BC2 they vanished and then in BF3 they got pasted on as an after thought.

im very passionate when it comes to the BF series games ive put so many hours into every version of the game and it kills me on the inside to see console crap thrown into the games or restrict what could have been done better.

its not all the consoles fault alot of it has to do with the devs. and EA
 
I could see submarines acting like Titans, where they would be submerged (read: "shields up!") until a certain ticket count. This would kind of work, but I think carriers make more sense.
 
Wildace said:
map sizes is a direct result from consoles having shit memory capacity and the devs no caring about each game play mechanic, and pretty much pasting jets in so they can say "this is a real BF game see... we have jets" which is BS
Click to expand...

You know consoles have different sized maps and playercount to the PC version?
 
DeathPrincess said:
So of the PC has larger maps than the consoles, how did consoles memory limitations stop the PC from having the larger maps it already has? :p
Click to expand...

the same reason deadspace 3 was a direct port.

to minimize the differences between the pc and console versions.


its pretty clear how they designed the BF3 maps

they took the average player count on pc which is 32 and designed a map around 32 people, stuck 2 runways and added jets upped the max player to 64 so they could say they have 64 player support on pc.

then they went to the console and reduced the size slightly to fit within their memory window

and its not just about the horizontal space but also vertical

the service ceiling on the jets is a joke nothing like climbing to hit an invisible wall when you can still see the ground.



"DICE boss Patrick Bach explained: "The biggest difference between the PC and console version of Battlefield 3 is that we have 64 players on PC and 24 players maximum on console. The rest is more or less the same: we use the same engine, the same technology, the same animation system, the same lighting system. Our aim is to give the player the exact same experience and not try to dumb down the console version."
 
Last edited:
I don't think you are following why what you said is logically weird.

Ok so if the PCs maps are small due to consoles limitations, as the map size has exceeded this limit, it's logical to assume this wasn't a limiting factor... No?

They should just dump the jets entirely from the series. They are boring and don't really fit in at all. But, say you made it so Jets can go 10 miles outside of the ground troops combat area, then that just kind of removes them from the battle other than with other jets...especially with the low range of AA weapons. At which point you might as well go on another air only server as you aren't really taking part in the main conflict, and allowing air to flee and be out of harms way by any other class would be massively imbalanced. :p
 
they intentionally kept the pc map sizes small to minimize the difference between the 2 versions.

is a much easier way to explain it.

you never want to hear anyone on the dev team say they made compromises to give the players the exact same experience
 
Kryptorchid said:
I have to disagree with this. Am I the only person that remembers how shitty the in-game server browsers were in BF1942, Vietnam, BF2, and BF2142? Populations wouldn't update, filters didn't work properly, some servers wouldn't even be visible in the server list, and other issues... I get that it seems backwards to launch a game from a browser and completely close out of the game every time you switch servers, but at least Battlelog actually works. I was apprehensive about it before BF3 was released, and now I have no issues with it.
Click to expand...

Battlelog is still crap. I run a server search and get some results, but running the exact same search again right away gets completely different results.
 
cukoodukoo said:
Screw EA/DICE. Screw BF series. I am done.
Click to expand...

i wouldnt say i am done, yet.

i wont pass judgement until ive played it. because playing it is what counts

wonder if im still in EA's good graces and will get an alpha invite to this. heh.

Battlefield 5 is probably where we might see some real change in the series since it wont have to worry about legacy limitations with ps3/360

at which point we can see just how the devs plan to expand the series or just milk it like cod.

im very skeptical about this series now tho after all the lies we were told about bf3.

chances are ill end up playing Arma 3 more than BF4 since i doubt BF4 will go back to its roots and have proper mod support and e-sports features land stuff like battle recorder ect. so many good features missing because they couldnt fit them into the console versions
 
Wildace said:
they intentionally kept the pc map sizes small to minimize the difference between the 2 versions.

is a much easier way to explain it.

you never want to hear anyone on the dev team say they made compromises to give the players the exact same experience
Click to expand...

They are giving the same experience just at a smaller scale.

RO2, a 64 player PC only game, has smaller maps...console only MAG has larger maps. One of the basic rules of level design is that you can't have too much space per person, otherwise you're going to have a very boring map and isolated players not really doing very much.
 
Wildace said:
i wouldnt say i am done, yet.

i wont pass judgement until ive played it. because playing it is what counts

wonder if im still in EA's good graces and will get an alpha invite to this. heh.

Battlefield 5 is probably where we might see some real change in the series since it wont have to worry about legacy limitations with ps3/360

at which point we can see just how the devs plan to expand the series or just milk it like cod.

im very skeptical about this series now tho after all the lies we were told about bf3.

chances are ill end up playing Arma 3 more than BF4 since i doubt BF4 will go back to its roots and have proper mod support and e-sports features land stuff like battle recorder ect. so many good features missing because they couldnt fit them into the console versions
Click to expand...

This is like saying " i wont say no to your dick going into my ass until I have seen it"
 
relapse808 said:
This is like saying " i wont say no to your dick going into my ass until I have seen it"
Click to expand...

I really don't want to know what you do with your game boxes. Otherwise, it's a game. Relax. And client-side netcode made one of its main debuts on a PC only game, Counter-Strike, back around beta 6 I believe. It is by no means a console-related issue.
 
DeathPrincess said:
They are giving the same experience just at a smaller scale.

RO2, a 64 player PC only game, has smaller maps...console only MAG has larger maps. One of the basic rules of level design is that you can't have too much space per person, otherwise you're going to have a very boring map and isolated players not really doing very much.
Click to expand...

im not a noob when it comes to making maps for Battlefield. i made one of the first custom maps for BF1942 back in 2003 granted it was a pretty shitty one by todays standards but that was my first one.

im well aware of how to scale and keep maps interesting. but you have to keep it interesting for all the game play mechanics, you can keep the map a certain size to keep infantry fun and action packed while still allowing air units some freedom and room to breathe.

just because you dont see a jet overhead does not mean hes not helping. aslong as a jet is keeping the enemy jet busy that means he is doing his job keeping you safe from the sky it doesnt matter if its 100m above you or 5000m to the west aslong as you are not taking a 2000lb JDAM or 2000lb LGB on the top of your tank the pilot is doing his job.

if he gets a break from keeping the air cover busy and can provide some close air support then he will but his primary goal is to keep the skies clear and you cant do that effectively when every 20 seconds you have to turn around from going out of bounds or hit an invisible wall in the sky.

a good pilot knows when to leave the sky to bring death from above to stop an enemy push. BF3 just lacks any room to do decent aerial maneuvers. BF1942 had pretty good scale/speed, BF2 wasnt as good as BF1942 but it was still manageable, BF3 jets were just a joke slap on to the game.

relapse808 said:
This is like saying " i wont say no to your dick going into my ass until I have seen it"
Click to expand...

how would you know unless you have tried it?

but seriously thats not even a good analogy.
 
Last edited:
TwistedAegis said:
I really don't want to know what you do with your game boxes. Otherwise, it's a game. Relax. And client-side netcode made one of its main debuts on a PC only game, Counter-Strike, back around beta 6 I believe. It is by no means a console-related issue.
Click to expand...

It's called a fleshlight drive bay! Damn. Now I know what to do with my old supertower case...:eek:
 
Aix. said:
Considering that a vast majority of players will not know each other in a "pub" setting, that solution comes up decidedly short. People who know each other (or come from a common clan/community) use TeamSpeak; regular players just join the server and can't communicate to the rest of their squad. The result is an overall lousy level of coordination and teamwork, while a squad of 4 buddies on TS3 can look like gods because they have what no one else has: a constant stream of battlefield information.

So yes, there is a point to having in-game voip. Mic-spammers can easily be countered by including a simple menu with checkboxes for muting.
Click to expand...

Agreed, 100%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top